Coming back soon
.
Baloch News Agency
.
BalochNA
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Friday, February 20, 2009
Bahrain halts gas talks with Iran over insult
MANAMA, Bahrain – Bahrain's foreign minister on Thursday blasted Iran for an Iranian official's remarks perceived as a threat to Bahraini sovereignty — a stinging rebuke a day after the tiny Gulf Arab kingdom halted talks on a key natural gas imports deal with Tehran.
Iranian officials, meanwhile, looked to soothe the rift sparked after former Iranian parliament speaker Ali Akbar Nateq Noori — a prominent cleric close to Iran's supreme leader — was quoted by Arab media last week as saying that Bahrain was the 14th province of Iran until 1970.
Bahrain's Foreign Minister Sheik Khalid bin Ahmed al-Khalifa said the remark was an "infringement of sovereignty" and a "distortion of historical fact."
"We are hurt by ... Iranian statements," he added. "These remarks must be silenced."
Bahrain fears Iran still holds its longtime claims to the island, ruled by a Sunni elite but with a poor Shiite majority that has close ties to the Shiite Iran.
Seeking to distance official Tehran from the statement, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hasan Qashqavi said this week that Iran respects Bahrain's independence and has "no territorial claims against this country," according to the Iranian ministry Web site.
Saudi Arabia was also angered over the controversial remark. Saudi official press agency, SPA, quoted on Thursday an unnamed official as saying Riyadh is following "with strong indignation ... allegations and claims to the land of brotherly kingdom of Bahrain."
The Sunni powerhouse "totally rejects such statements and expresses deep regret they were issued by circles connected to the Iranian leadership," the report said.
Iran ruled Bahrain for a period in the 17th century and some hardline Iranians still insist today it belongs to Iran. The island became an independent Arab nation after a 1970 referendum that ended the British protectorate.
Bahrain-Iranian relations were strained after the 1979 Iranian revolution but began to thaw after President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad visited in 2007, when the two signed a memorandum of understanding on the gas deal. Iran was to provide Bahrain with one million cubic feet per day of natural gas and details were expected to be finalized soon.
Khalid confirmed Thursday that negotiations have stopped, and reiterated demands for "full respect of Bahrain's sovereignty." But it wasn't clear what exactly Manama expected from Tehran to resume the talks.
Iranian officials, meanwhile, looked to soothe the rift sparked after former Iranian parliament speaker Ali Akbar Nateq Noori — a prominent cleric close to Iran's supreme leader — was quoted by Arab media last week as saying that Bahrain was the 14th province of Iran until 1970.
Bahrain's Foreign Minister Sheik Khalid bin Ahmed al-Khalifa said the remark was an "infringement of sovereignty" and a "distortion of historical fact."
"We are hurt by ... Iranian statements," he added. "These remarks must be silenced."
Bahrain fears Iran still holds its longtime claims to the island, ruled by a Sunni elite but with a poor Shiite majority that has close ties to the Shiite Iran.
Seeking to distance official Tehran from the statement, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hasan Qashqavi said this week that Iran respects Bahrain's independence and has "no territorial claims against this country," according to the Iranian ministry Web site.
Saudi Arabia was also angered over the controversial remark. Saudi official press agency, SPA, quoted on Thursday an unnamed official as saying Riyadh is following "with strong indignation ... allegations and claims to the land of brotherly kingdom of Bahrain."
The Sunni powerhouse "totally rejects such statements and expresses deep regret they were issued by circles connected to the Iranian leadership," the report said.
Iran ruled Bahrain for a period in the 17th century and some hardline Iranians still insist today it belongs to Iran. The island became an independent Arab nation after a 1970 referendum that ended the British protectorate.
Bahrain-Iranian relations were strained after the 1979 Iranian revolution but began to thaw after President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad visited in 2007, when the two signed a memorandum of understanding on the gas deal. Iran was to provide Bahrain with one million cubic feet per day of natural gas and details were expected to be finalized soon.
Khalid confirmed Thursday that negotiations have stopped, and reiterated demands for "full respect of Bahrain's sovereignty." But it wasn't clear what exactly Manama expected from Tehran to resume the talks.
Ap Associated Press
White House says world can't delay on Iran
WASHINGTON – AP - The White House says the international community must work together to urgently address Iran's uranium enrichment activities.
Press secretary Robert Gibbs said Friday that point is underscored by a United Nations report that said Tehran had amassed enough uranium to make an atom bomb.
He said the report by the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency represented "another lost opportunity" for Iran as it continues to "renege" on its international obligations.
Gibbs called Iran an "urgent problem that has to be addressed" without delay.
He said the international community won't have confidence that Iran's program is peaceful if it doesn't comply with the U.N.
White House: US, allies 'can't delay' addressing Iran worries
WASHINGTON (AFP) – The United States and its partners "can't delay" addressing worries over Iran's suspect nuclear program, the White House said Friday after a new UN report on Tehran's atomic work.
"This White House understands that -- working with our allies -- that this is an urgent problem that has to be addressed and we can't delay addressing," spokesman Robert Gibbs told reporters.
The comments came a day after International Atomic Energy Agency said Iran was continuing to enrich uranium, a key stage in the atom bomb making process, but had slowed down the expansion of its enrichment activities.
The report from the UN nuclear watchdog conceded that, despite six years of intensive investigation, it was no closer to determining whether Iran's disputed nuclear drive is as peaceful as Tehran claims.
"The report represents another lost opportunity for Iran as it continues to renege on its international obligations. Absent compliance, the international community cannot have confidence that this program is exclusively of a peaceful nature," said Gibbs.
"It does underscore the urgency with which the international community must work together to address these enrichment activities," said the spokesman.
Ap
Press secretary Robert Gibbs said Friday that point is underscored by a United Nations report that said Tehran had amassed enough uranium to make an atom bomb.
He said the report by the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency represented "another lost opportunity" for Iran as it continues to "renege" on its international obligations.
Gibbs called Iran an "urgent problem that has to be addressed" without delay.
He said the international community won't have confidence that Iran's program is peaceful if it doesn't comply with the U.N.
White House: US, allies 'can't delay' addressing Iran worries
WASHINGTON (AFP) – The United States and its partners "can't delay" addressing worries over Iran's suspect nuclear program, the White House said Friday after a new UN report on Tehran's atomic work.
"This White House understands that -- working with our allies -- that this is an urgent problem that has to be addressed and we can't delay addressing," spokesman Robert Gibbs told reporters.
The comments came a day after International Atomic Energy Agency said Iran was continuing to enrich uranium, a key stage in the atom bomb making process, but had slowed down the expansion of its enrichment activities.
The report from the UN nuclear watchdog conceded that, despite six years of intensive investigation, it was no closer to determining whether Iran's disputed nuclear drive is as peaceful as Tehran claims.
"The report represents another lost opportunity for Iran as it continues to renege on its international obligations. Absent compliance, the international community cannot have confidence that this program is exclusively of a peaceful nature," said Gibbs.
"It does underscore the urgency with which the international community must work together to address these enrichment activities," said the spokesman.
Qatar regrets Iranians' remarks against Bahrain
Qatar on Thursday expressed a regret to some Iranian officials' "infringement" against Bahrain's sovereignty and independence, reported the Qatar News Agency.
"Such negative statements constitute an infringement on the sovereignty" of a member state of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), an official source at the Qatari Foreign Ministry was quoted as saying.
A number of Iranian officials have reportedly claimed that Bahrain was an integral part of the Islamic Republic of Iran and questioned its Arabic identity.
Voicing a regret from the Qatari side, the Foreign Ministry source said that the Iranians' remarks hampered effort made by GCC states and their sincere interest in building relations of friendship and cooperation between them and Iran.
The GCC-Iranian ties has been marked by amity, mutual respect, good neighborliness and non-intervention in states' internal affairs to strengthen relations of cooperation and to serve the region's peoples, said the source.
Iranian officials' sovereignty claims have also drawn criticism from Kuwait and Arab organizations.
In its weekly meeting, the Kuwaiti cabinet on Monday expressed its dismay over the "negative" remarks, saying it would "hinder efforts exerted by the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and its sincere desire to build a relationship of friendship and cooperation with Iran."
However, Iran's Foreign Ministry has appeared to clarify its official stance as its spokesman Hassan Qashqavi said Thursday that "we have repeatedly said that we respect sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of all neighboring countries and we have no claim on Bahrain."
Bahrain was a British protectorate after 1861, and became independent in 1971. In its ancient history, the Gulf country has brought rule and influence from many foreign nations due to its strategic location.
Xinhua
"Such negative statements constitute an infringement on the sovereignty" of a member state of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), an official source at the Qatari Foreign Ministry was quoted as saying.
A number of Iranian officials have reportedly claimed that Bahrain was an integral part of the Islamic Republic of Iran and questioned its Arabic identity.
Voicing a regret from the Qatari side, the Foreign Ministry source said that the Iranians' remarks hampered effort made by GCC states and their sincere interest in building relations of friendship and cooperation between them and Iran.
The GCC-Iranian ties has been marked by amity, mutual respect, good neighborliness and non-intervention in states' internal affairs to strengthen relations of cooperation and to serve the region's peoples, said the source.
Iranian officials' sovereignty claims have also drawn criticism from Kuwait and Arab organizations.
In its weekly meeting, the Kuwaiti cabinet on Monday expressed its dismay over the "negative" remarks, saying it would "hinder efforts exerted by the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and its sincere desire to build a relationship of friendship and cooperation with Iran."
However, Iran's Foreign Ministry has appeared to clarify its official stance as its spokesman Hassan Qashqavi said Thursday that "we have repeatedly said that we respect sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of all neighboring countries and we have no claim on Bahrain."
Bahrain was a British protectorate after 1861, and became independent in 1971. In its ancient history, the Gulf country has brought rule and influence from many foreign nations due to its strategic location.
NKorea could be ready to test fire missile in days: analysts
LONDON – North Korea could be ready to test fire an intermediate range ballistic missile by the end of the month, respected defence analysis group Jane's said Friday.
According to experts at Jane's Defence Weekly, satellite imagery taken on Wednesday indicated that Pyongyang was preparing to either launch a prototype Taepodong 2 missile, or a Paektusan 2 space launch vehicle.
"There has been a significant increase in launch preparation activity at the Musudan-ni Launch Facility," Joseph Bermudez, an analyst at the magazine, said.
Bermudez said satellite imagery and reports indicated that the activities included activation or installation of telemetry equipment and radars, the arrival of numerous trucks and support vehicles, a rise in activity at the engine test stand, and launch pad and umbilical tower maintenance.
The magazine also said that support facilities for the engine test stand were being expanded.
South Korean Defence Minister Lee Hang-See said earlier Friday that Seoul would target North Korean launch sites if its ships came under missile attack in the Yellow Sea.
Tensions have risen since the communist North cancelled all peace accords with the South, including one recognising the Yellow Sea border as an interim frontier.
The area saw deadly naval clashes in 1999 and 2002.
The North's military announced Thursday it is "fully ready" for war with South Korea.
Pyongyang is angry at South Korean President Lee Myung-Bak, who rolled back his predecessors' policy of largely unconditional aid and engagement with the North.
He has linked major economic aid to the North's progress on denuclearisation.
AFP
According to experts at Jane's Defence Weekly, satellite imagery taken on Wednesday indicated that Pyongyang was preparing to either launch a prototype Taepodong 2 missile, or a Paektusan 2 space launch vehicle.
"There has been a significant increase in launch preparation activity at the Musudan-ni Launch Facility," Joseph Bermudez, an analyst at the magazine, said.
Bermudez said satellite imagery and reports indicated that the activities included activation or installation of telemetry equipment and radars, the arrival of numerous trucks and support vehicles, a rise in activity at the engine test stand, and launch pad and umbilical tower maintenance.
The magazine also said that support facilities for the engine test stand were being expanded.
South Korean Defence Minister Lee Hang-See said earlier Friday that Seoul would target North Korean launch sites if its ships came under missile attack in the Yellow Sea.
Tensions have risen since the communist North cancelled all peace accords with the South, including one recognising the Yellow Sea border as an interim frontier.
The area saw deadly naval clashes in 1999 and 2002.
The North's military announced Thursday it is "fully ready" for war with South Korea.
Pyongyang is angry at South Korean President Lee Myung-Bak, who rolled back his predecessors' policy of largely unconditional aid and engagement with the North.
He has linked major economic aid to the North's progress on denuclearisation.
AFP
Iran offered to end attacks on British troops in Iraq, claims diplomat
Iran offered to curb attacks on British troops in Iraq in exchange for British acceptance of its nuclear programme, a top British diplomat has said.
The claim is made by Sir John Sawers, now Britain's ambassador to the UN, in a BBC documentary to air tomorrow night. Iran and the West: Nuclear confrontation charts the diplomatic efforts to persuade Iran to stop enriching uranium since its secret enrichment plant in Natanz was exposed in 2002.
"There were various Iranians who would come to London and suggest we had tea in some hotel or other. They'd do the same in Paris, they'd do the same in Berlin, and then we'd compare notes among the three of us," Sawers, who was political director at the foreign office at the time, told the BBC.
At the time US and British officials suspected Iran of supplying Shia militants in Iraq with sophisticated roadside bombs and other weapons which were used against coalition troops.
Sawers said: "The Iranians wanted to be able to strike a deal whereby they stopped killing our forces in Iraq in return for them being allowed to carry on with their nuclear programme: 'We stop killing you in Iraq, stop undermining the political process there, you allow us to carry on with our nuclear programme without let or hindrance.' "
Britain dismissed the deal. Britain, together with the US, France, Germany, Russia and China, have offered economic incentives and support for Iran's nuclear energy plans in return for a suspension of uranium enrichment. The UN security council has also demanded suspension, and has imposed sanctions for Iran's failure to comply. Iran insists its nuclear programme is for peaceful energy generation.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported yesterday that Iran was continuing to expand its nuclear plant, although at a slower rate than last year, and had already amassed more than a tonne of low enriched uranium.
That is technically enough for a single nuclear weapon, but UN officials caution that Iran faces many more technical hurdles before it is capable of making a bomb.
The BBC documentary charts some of the missed diplomatic opportunities for defusing tensions between Iran and the west, particularly while Mohamed Khatami was president, from 1997 to 2005. For example, it details how much help Iran offered to the US in ousting the Taliban and al-Qaida in Afghanistan after the September 11 attacks.
Hillary Mann, a former US state department official recalled how an Iranian military official tried to guide the US at a meeting in New York in late 2001.
"He unfurled the map on the table and started to point to targets that the US needed to focus on, particularly in the north," said Mann. "We took the map to Centcom, the US Central Command, and certainly that did become the US military strategy."
The claim is made by Sir John Sawers, now Britain's ambassador to the UN, in a BBC documentary to air tomorrow night. Iran and the West: Nuclear confrontation charts the diplomatic efforts to persuade Iran to stop enriching uranium since its secret enrichment plant in Natanz was exposed in 2002.
"There were various Iranians who would come to London and suggest we had tea in some hotel or other. They'd do the same in Paris, they'd do the same in Berlin, and then we'd compare notes among the three of us," Sawers, who was political director at the foreign office at the time, told the BBC.
At the time US and British officials suspected Iran of supplying Shia militants in Iraq with sophisticated roadside bombs and other weapons which were used against coalition troops.
Sawers said: "The Iranians wanted to be able to strike a deal whereby they stopped killing our forces in Iraq in return for them being allowed to carry on with their nuclear programme: 'We stop killing you in Iraq, stop undermining the political process there, you allow us to carry on with our nuclear programme without let or hindrance.' "
Britain dismissed the deal. Britain, together with the US, France, Germany, Russia and China, have offered economic incentives and support for Iran's nuclear energy plans in return for a suspension of uranium enrichment. The UN security council has also demanded suspension, and has imposed sanctions for Iran's failure to comply. Iran insists its nuclear programme is for peaceful energy generation.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported yesterday that Iran was continuing to expand its nuclear plant, although at a slower rate than last year, and had already amassed more than a tonne of low enriched uranium.
That is technically enough for a single nuclear weapon, but UN officials caution that Iran faces many more technical hurdles before it is capable of making a bomb.
The BBC documentary charts some of the missed diplomatic opportunities for defusing tensions between Iran and the west, particularly while Mohamed Khatami was president, from 1997 to 2005. For example, it details how much help Iran offered to the US in ousting the Taliban and al-Qaida in Afghanistan after the September 11 attacks.
Hillary Mann, a former US state department official recalled how an Iranian military official tried to guide the US at a meeting in New York in late 2001.
"He unfurled the map on the table and started to point to targets that the US needed to focus on, particularly in the north," said Mann. "We took the map to Centcom, the US Central Command, and certainly that did become the US military strategy."
Guardian
Thursday, February 19, 2009
12 Implementation of a language policy for the world based on multilingualism1
The General Conference,
Recognizing the need to improve understanding and communication among peoples,
Also recognizing the great importance of safeguarding the linguistic and cultural heritage of humanity and extending the influence of each of the cultures and languages of which that heritage is composed,
Considering the current threat to linguistic diversity posed by the globalization of communication and the tendency to use a single language, at the risk of marginalizing the other major languages of the world, or even of causing the lesser-used languages, including regional languages, to disappear,
Also considering that educating young people throughout the world involves sensitizing them to dialogue between cultures, which engenders tolerance and mutual respect,
Further considering that substantial progress has been made in the last few decades by the language sciences, but that insufficient attention has been paid to the extraordinary ability of children to reproduce sounds at key periods of their development,
Noting that the ability of children to acquire phonetic and grammatical skills has been scientifically corroborated,
Considering that these skills enable young children to acquire competence at an early age in real communication, both passive and active, in at least two languages, whichever they may be,
Aware that democratic access to knowledge depends on a command of several languages and that provision of such access for all is a duty at a time when private language training, which is both expensive and elitist, is spreading in many countries,
Mindful of the resolutions adopted in support of bilingual education at its 18th and 19th sessions (1974 and 1976),
Taking into account the establishment by the Executive Board in October 1998 of the Advisory Committee for Linguistic Pluralism and Multilingual Education and the creation of the Languages Division in the Education Sector by the Director-General in 1998,
Recommends that Member States:
(a) create the conditions for a social, intellectual and media environment of an international character which is conducive to linguistic pluralism;
(b) promote, through multilingual education, democratic access to knowledge for all citizens, whatever their mother tongue, and build linguistic pluralism; strategies to achieve these goals could include:
the early acquisition (in kindergartens and nursery schools) of a second language in addition to the mother tongue, offering alternatives;
further education in this second language at primary-school level based on its use as a medium of instruction, thus using two languages for the acquisition of knowledge throughout the school course up to university level;
intensive and transdisciplinary learning of at least a third modern language in secondary school, so that when pupils leave school they have a working knowledge of three languages - which should represent the normal range of practical linguistic skills in the twenty-first century;
an assessment of secondary-school leaving certificates with a view to promoting a grasp of modern languages from the point of view of communication and understanding;
international exchanges of primary- and secondary-school teachers, offering them a legal framework for teaching their subjects in schools in other countries, using their own languages and thus enabling their pupils to acquire both knowledge and linguistic skills;
due attention in education, vocational training and industry to the potential represented by regional languages, minority languages, where they exist, and migrants’ languages of origin;
availability to teachers and education authorities of a computerized network, including a database, to facilitate exchanges of information and experience;
the establishment of a national and/or regional committee to study and make proposals on linguistic pluralism in order to initiate the necessary dialogue between the representatives of all professions and all disciplines so that they can identify the main lines of a language education system which is adapted to each country but which also facilitates international communication, while preserving the rich and inalienable linguistic and cultural heritage of humanity;
(c) encourage the study of the languages of the major ancient and modern civilizations, with a view to safeguarding and promoting a literary education;
Invites the Director-General to refer the matter to the Advisory Committee for Linguistic Pluralism and Multilingual Education.
37 Draft recommendation on the promotion and use of multilingualism and universal access to cyberspace 1
The General Conference,
Having examined the report submitted by the Director-General, in accordance with 29 C/Resolution 36, on the implementation of activities on the ethical, legal and societal aspects of cyberspace,
Taking note of the results of activities carried out by the Organization on the promotion and use of multilingualism and universal access to cyberspace, as reported in document 30 C/31,
Also taking note of the establishment by the Director-General of the Advisory Committee for Linguistic Pluralism and Multilingual Education, in accordance with 29 C/Resolution 38 (para. 2.B(b)),
Recognizing the importance of multilingualism for the promotion of universal access to information, particularly to information in the public domain,
Recognizing also the importance of multilingualism for the promotion of multiculturality on global information networks,
Reiterates its conviction that UNESCO should play a leading international role in promoting access to information in the public domain, especially by encouraging multilingualism and cultural diversity on global information networks;
Invites Member States, non-governmental organizations, the world intellectual community and the scientific institutions concerned to support and participate actively in the development of multilingualism and cultural diversity on the global information networks by facilitating free and universal access to information in the public domain;
Invites Member States to approve, in this light, the proposed new strategy "Initiative B@bel" outlined in paragraph 14 of document 30 C/31;
Invites the Director-General, after consultation with the Advisory Committee for Linguistic Pluralism and Multilingual Education, to submit for approval to the 159th session of the Executive Board a list of the first projects to be undertaken in this framework;
Also invites the Director-General to undertake the following concrete actions to promote multilingualism and cultural diversity on global information networks:
(a) to strengthen activities to make cultural heritage in the public domain which is preserved in museums, libraries and archives freely accessible on the global information networks;
(b) to support the formulation of national and international policies and principles encouraging all Member States to promote the development and use of translation tools and terminology for better interoperability;
(c) to encourage the provision of resources for linguistic pluralism through global networks, in particular by reinforcing the UNESCO international observatory on the information society;
(d) to pursue further consultations with Member States and competent international governmental and non-governmental organizations for closer cooperation on language rights, respect for linguistic diversity and the expansion of multilingual electronic resources on the global information networks;
6. Further invites the Director-General to submit to it at its 31st session a report on the implementation of the actions outlined above and a draft recommendation on the promotion and use of multilingualism and universal access to cyberspace.
UNESCO
Recognizing the need to improve understanding and communication among peoples,
Also recognizing the great importance of safeguarding the linguistic and cultural heritage of humanity and extending the influence of each of the cultures and languages of which that heritage is composed,
Considering the current threat to linguistic diversity posed by the globalization of communication and the tendency to use a single language, at the risk of marginalizing the other major languages of the world, or even of causing the lesser-used languages, including regional languages, to disappear,
Also considering that educating young people throughout the world involves sensitizing them to dialogue between cultures, which engenders tolerance and mutual respect,
Further considering that substantial progress has been made in the last few decades by the language sciences, but that insufficient attention has been paid to the extraordinary ability of children to reproduce sounds at key periods of their development,
Noting that the ability of children to acquire phonetic and grammatical skills has been scientifically corroborated,
Considering that these skills enable young children to acquire competence at an early age in real communication, both passive and active, in at least two languages, whichever they may be,
Aware that democratic access to knowledge depends on a command of several languages and that provision of such access for all is a duty at a time when private language training, which is both expensive and elitist, is spreading in many countries,
Mindful of the resolutions adopted in support of bilingual education at its 18th and 19th sessions (1974 and 1976),
Taking into account the establishment by the Executive Board in October 1998 of the Advisory Committee for Linguistic Pluralism and Multilingual Education and the creation of the Languages Division in the Education Sector by the Director-General in 1998,
Recommends that Member States:
(a) create the conditions for a social, intellectual and media environment of an international character which is conducive to linguistic pluralism;
(b) promote, through multilingual education, democratic access to knowledge for all citizens, whatever their mother tongue, and build linguistic pluralism; strategies to achieve these goals could include:
the early acquisition (in kindergartens and nursery schools) of a second language in addition to the mother tongue, offering alternatives;
further education in this second language at primary-school level based on its use as a medium of instruction, thus using two languages for the acquisition of knowledge throughout the school course up to university level;
intensive and transdisciplinary learning of at least a third modern language in secondary school, so that when pupils leave school they have a working knowledge of three languages - which should represent the normal range of practical linguistic skills in the twenty-first century;
an assessment of secondary-school leaving certificates with a view to promoting a grasp of modern languages from the point of view of communication and understanding;
international exchanges of primary- and secondary-school teachers, offering them a legal framework for teaching their subjects in schools in other countries, using their own languages and thus enabling their pupils to acquire both knowledge and linguistic skills;
due attention in education, vocational training and industry to the potential represented by regional languages, minority languages, where they exist, and migrants’ languages of origin;
availability to teachers and education authorities of a computerized network, including a database, to facilitate exchanges of information and experience;
the establishment of a national and/or regional committee to study and make proposals on linguistic pluralism in order to initiate the necessary dialogue between the representatives of all professions and all disciplines so that they can identify the main lines of a language education system which is adapted to each country but which also facilitates international communication, while preserving the rich and inalienable linguistic and cultural heritage of humanity;
(c) encourage the study of the languages of the major ancient and modern civilizations, with a view to safeguarding and promoting a literary education;
Invites the Director-General to refer the matter to the Advisory Committee for Linguistic Pluralism and Multilingual Education.
37 Draft recommendation on the promotion and use of multilingualism and universal access to cyberspace 1
The General Conference,
Having examined the report submitted by the Director-General, in accordance with 29 C/Resolution 36, on the implementation of activities on the ethical, legal and societal aspects of cyberspace,
Taking note of the results of activities carried out by the Organization on the promotion and use of multilingualism and universal access to cyberspace, as reported in document 30 C/31,
Also taking note of the establishment by the Director-General of the Advisory Committee for Linguistic Pluralism and Multilingual Education, in accordance with 29 C/Resolution 38 (para. 2.B(b)),
Recognizing the importance of multilingualism for the promotion of universal access to information, particularly to information in the public domain,
Recognizing also the importance of multilingualism for the promotion of multiculturality on global information networks,
Reiterates its conviction that UNESCO should play a leading international role in promoting access to information in the public domain, especially by encouraging multilingualism and cultural diversity on global information networks;
Invites Member States, non-governmental organizations, the world intellectual community and the scientific institutions concerned to support and participate actively in the development of multilingualism and cultural diversity on the global information networks by facilitating free and universal access to information in the public domain;
Invites Member States to approve, in this light, the proposed new strategy "Initiative B@bel" outlined in paragraph 14 of document 30 C/31;
Invites the Director-General, after consultation with the Advisory Committee for Linguistic Pluralism and Multilingual Education, to submit for approval to the 159th session of the Executive Board a list of the first projects to be undertaken in this framework;
Also invites the Director-General to undertake the following concrete actions to promote multilingualism and cultural diversity on global information networks:
(a) to strengthen activities to make cultural heritage in the public domain which is preserved in museums, libraries and archives freely accessible on the global information networks;
(b) to support the formulation of national and international policies and principles encouraging all Member States to promote the development and use of translation tools and terminology for better interoperability;
(c) to encourage the provision of resources for linguistic pluralism through global networks, in particular by reinforcing the UNESCO international observatory on the information society;
(d) to pursue further consultations with Member States and competent international governmental and non-governmental organizations for closer cooperation on language rights, respect for linguistic diversity and the expansion of multilingual electronic resources on the global information networks;
6. Further invites the Director-General to submit to it at its 31st session a report on the implementation of the actions outlined above and a draft recommendation on the promotion and use of multilingualism and universal access to cyberspace.
Message from H.E. Mr. Jan Kavan, President of the Fifty-seventh Session of the United Nations General Assembly
International Mother Language Day
In order to preserve the cultural heritage of humanity, in November 1999, the General Conference of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) proclaimed the 21st day of February of every year as International Mother Language Day. In a world of globalization, where a few languages take priority, the United Nations and UNESCO sought to protect and promote linguistic diversity and multilingual education.
In recognition of the tremendous creativity involved in formulating a language, given that there are some 6,700 languages spoken amongst our planet's population, mother language was acknowledged as an important and precious element of the cultural heritage and identity of a community. The date 21 February was chosen in homage to 3 "language martyrs" from Bangladesh who were shot on 21/22 February 1952, during public demonstrations to promote their mother language, Bangla, as a national language along with Urdu, in the then newly created Pakistan. The origin of this day is attributed to an organization known as "Mother Language lovers of the World" in Canada who proposed this idea to the United Nations and UNESCO and were told by UNESCO that this request should be presented through a member state. The Government of Bangladesh obliged.
On this day it would also be appropriate to pay homage to the memory of Professor Stephen Wurm, an Australian of Hungarian origin, who spoke some 50 languages himself, and who compiled the "Atlas of the World's Languages in Danger of Disappearing." In this work he has described the 3000 mother languages that are endangered and the processes leading to their gradual extinction. Examples of successful initiatives to save some of them are also provided in this atlas. One such example is the mother language Cornish in England that is said to have become extinct in 1777. Recent efforts to revive it have been successful and now over 1000 persons speak the language.
As a tool of communication, the mother language has a powerful role in the formation of the individual, and is " the most powerful instrument of preserving and developing our tangible and intangible heritage." In recognition of this phenomenon, in November 2001, UNESCO followed up the proclamation of the International Mother Language Day, by promulgating the Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity. Protection of traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples and combating illicit traffic in cultural goods and services are some of the several aims of this Declaration. Member States are encouraged to foster multilingual education. Switzerland, Norway, The Netherlands and India are some examples of countries where the populations are encouraged to be multilingual.
The Internet is a powerful tool to facilitate universal access to cultural information, currently only available in libraries and museums, to enhance knowledge and respect for cultures other than one's own. Similarly Member States may adopt policies in support of translation tools and multilingual electronic resources as positive initiatives in defense of cultural diversity.
I hope that the International Mother Language Day will inspire peoples of the world towards mutual respectful tolerance of our rich cultural traditions of which mother language is one of the most precious.
In recognition of the tremendous creativity involved in formulating a language, given that there are some 6,700 languages spoken amongst our planet's population, mother language was acknowledged as an important and precious element of the cultural heritage and identity of a community. The date 21 February was chosen in homage to 3 "language martyrs" from Bangladesh who were shot on 21/22 February 1952, during public demonstrations to promote their mother language, Bangla, as a national language along with Urdu, in the then newly created Pakistan. The origin of this day is attributed to an organization known as "Mother Language lovers of the World" in Canada who proposed this idea to the United Nations and UNESCO and were told by UNESCO that this request should be presented through a member state. The Government of Bangladesh obliged.
On this day it would also be appropriate to pay homage to the memory of Professor Stephen Wurm, an Australian of Hungarian origin, who spoke some 50 languages himself, and who compiled the "Atlas of the World's Languages in Danger of Disappearing." In this work he has described the 3000 mother languages that are endangered and the processes leading to their gradual extinction. Examples of successful initiatives to save some of them are also provided in this atlas. One such example is the mother language Cornish in England that is said to have become extinct in 1777. Recent efforts to revive it have been successful and now over 1000 persons speak the language.
As a tool of communication, the mother language has a powerful role in the formation of the individual, and is " the most powerful instrument of preserving and developing our tangible and intangible heritage." In recognition of this phenomenon, in November 2001, UNESCO followed up the proclamation of the International Mother Language Day, by promulgating the Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity. Protection of traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples and combating illicit traffic in cultural goods and services are some of the several aims of this Declaration. Member States are encouraged to foster multilingual education. Switzerland, Norway, The Netherlands and India are some examples of countries where the populations are encouraged to be multilingual.
The Internet is a powerful tool to facilitate universal access to cultural information, currently only available in libraries and museums, to enhance knowledge and respect for cultures other than one's own. Similarly Member States may adopt policies in support of translation tools and multilingual electronic resources as positive initiatives in defense of cultural diversity.
I hope that the International Mother Language Day will inspire peoples of the world towards mutual respectful tolerance of our rich cultural traditions of which mother language is one of the most precious.
UN
Iranian builders win contracts in city that Shias helped to wreck
Iran has won a $1.5 billion (£1 billion) contract to build 5,000 houses and three hotels in Basra, the Iraqi city where British forces have been fighting Shia extremists believed to be armed by Tehran.
An Iranian company has succeeded with its bid for the project because British and American companies, wary of security conditions, were slow to make offers, the head of investment in Iraq’s biggest port toldThe Times. “The Iranians are going for all the contracts,” one British official said in Basra.
The irony is not lost on British diplomats in Basra involved in trying to help Iraq to redevelop its economy and infrastructure.
The Shia extremists who turned Basra into a violent and unstable city two years ago, causing a high number of British military casualties, are now believed to be in Iran.
This week soldiers of The Queen’s Royal Hussars, attired in their regimental berets, proved how security has changed for the better in Basra as they went on foot patrol with colleagues from the Iraqi Army’s 51 Brigade, part of the 14th Division which controls the city. Their route took them past areas of considerable deprivation in northern Basra but there were pockets where, incongruously, expensive-looking villas were under construction.
Lieutenant-Colonel Chris Coles, commanding officer of The Queen’s Royal Hussars, said that the security environment had changed so much that life for his soldiers at the tiny base called Thar Allah in the heart of the community in the northern Basra district was quieter than he had envisaged when his regiment arrived last year.
Despite the relatively peaceful conditions, Hayder Ali, the head of the Basra Investment Commission, said companies in Britain seemed unaware that security was no longer an issue. “Basra is open for business but UK companies say they need more time, although now is the moment to invest,” Dr Ali said.
The caution of British companies was confirmed by Nigel Hayward, the British Consul-General, who said: “Companies that are less risk-averse will do well here, but British companies are pretty cautious.”
Iran has traditionally had strong trading links with its neighbour but Nouri al-Maliki, the Iraqi Prime Minister, indicated during a visit to Baghdad by President Sarkozy of France last week that Iraq’s principal allies in the six-year counter-insurgency would be first choice for reconstruction contracts.
It was a reminder to France and other countries, such as Germany, which opposed the USled invasion in 2003, that their new-found enthusiasm for investing in Iraq now that the country is stabilising will not put them first in the queue.
Iraq is currently awash with visits from foreign and finance ministers from Europe and elsewhere, eager to jump on the investment band-wagon. Frank-Walter Steinmeier, the German Foreign Minister, was in Baghdad this week. “Germany wants to assist Iraq in reconsruction,” he said.
Iran has been investing heavily in different parts of Iraq for some time. Iranians are financing many construction projects in the holy shrine city of Najaf, in southern Iraq, and have leapt in to benefit from the newly built airport.
The announcement of the “new town” for Basra represents Tehran’s biggest construction contract in the country since 2003. But Iranian companies are already dominating Iraq’s building projects. The wealthier Iraqis in Basra and the Kurdish north apparently like the luxurious Iranian designs.
Dr Ali said that Karam, the Iranian company that has won the development contract, had proposed three possible locations for the huge complex, one in the centre of Basra and the other two on the outskirts. Apart from the houses and hotels, the plan also includes schools, a supermarket, 2,000 shops, parks and health facilities.
“The UK is open to bid for these contracts, and we have a good relationship with the British here in Basra, so why are companies not investing in the city?” Dr Ali asked.
The successful bid by the Iranians followed the visit to Baghdad last week of Manouchehr Mottaki, the Iranian Foreign Minister.
British construction companies may not be moving in smartly for Basra reconstruction contracts, but Shell is negotiating for a $3-4 billion contract to trap the flared gas from the oilfields that currently goes to waste, and converting it into energy. There is enough gas burning into the air to power a large city. Japan has also offered a $1.5 billion soft loan to help with rehabilitating Iraq’s oil infrastructure.
Rising numbers
50% Rise in house prices in central Baghdad in the past year
500,000 Refugees expected to return
39m People living in the country by 2015, Government estimates
1.9m Extra housing units needed to satisfy growth
TIMESONLINE
An Iranian company has succeeded with its bid for the project because British and American companies, wary of security conditions, were slow to make offers, the head of investment in Iraq’s biggest port toldThe Times. “The Iranians are going for all the contracts,” one British official said in Basra.
The irony is not lost on British diplomats in Basra involved in trying to help Iraq to redevelop its economy and infrastructure.
The Shia extremists who turned Basra into a violent and unstable city two years ago, causing a high number of British military casualties, are now believed to be in Iran.
This week soldiers of The Queen’s Royal Hussars, attired in their regimental berets, proved how security has changed for the better in Basra as they went on foot patrol with colleagues from the Iraqi Army’s 51 Brigade, part of the 14th Division which controls the city. Their route took them past areas of considerable deprivation in northern Basra but there were pockets where, incongruously, expensive-looking villas were under construction.
Lieutenant-Colonel Chris Coles, commanding officer of The Queen’s Royal Hussars, said that the security environment had changed so much that life for his soldiers at the tiny base called Thar Allah in the heart of the community in the northern Basra district was quieter than he had envisaged when his regiment arrived last year.
Despite the relatively peaceful conditions, Hayder Ali, the head of the Basra Investment Commission, said companies in Britain seemed unaware that security was no longer an issue. “Basra is open for business but UK companies say they need more time, although now is the moment to invest,” Dr Ali said.
The caution of British companies was confirmed by Nigel Hayward, the British Consul-General, who said: “Companies that are less risk-averse will do well here, but British companies are pretty cautious.”
Iran has traditionally had strong trading links with its neighbour but Nouri al-Maliki, the Iraqi Prime Minister, indicated during a visit to Baghdad by President Sarkozy of France last week that Iraq’s principal allies in the six-year counter-insurgency would be first choice for reconstruction contracts.
It was a reminder to France and other countries, such as Germany, which opposed the USled invasion in 2003, that their new-found enthusiasm for investing in Iraq now that the country is stabilising will not put them first in the queue.
Iraq is currently awash with visits from foreign and finance ministers from Europe and elsewhere, eager to jump on the investment band-wagon. Frank-Walter Steinmeier, the German Foreign Minister, was in Baghdad this week. “Germany wants to assist Iraq in reconsruction,” he said.
Iran has been investing heavily in different parts of Iraq for some time. Iranians are financing many construction projects in the holy shrine city of Najaf, in southern Iraq, and have leapt in to benefit from the newly built airport.
The announcement of the “new town” for Basra represents Tehran’s biggest construction contract in the country since 2003. But Iranian companies are already dominating Iraq’s building projects. The wealthier Iraqis in Basra and the Kurdish north apparently like the luxurious Iranian designs.
Dr Ali said that Karam, the Iranian company that has won the development contract, had proposed three possible locations for the huge complex, one in the centre of Basra and the other two on the outskirts. Apart from the houses and hotels, the plan also includes schools, a supermarket, 2,000 shops, parks and health facilities.
“The UK is open to bid for these contracts, and we have a good relationship with the British here in Basra, so why are companies not investing in the city?” Dr Ali asked.
The successful bid by the Iranians followed the visit to Baghdad last week of Manouchehr Mottaki, the Iranian Foreign Minister.
British construction companies may not be moving in smartly for Basra reconstruction contracts, but Shell is negotiating for a $3-4 billion contract to trap the flared gas from the oilfields that currently goes to waste, and converting it into energy. There is enough gas burning into the air to power a large city. Japan has also offered a $1.5 billion soft loan to help with rehabilitating Iraq’s oil infrastructure.
Rising numbers
50% Rise in house prices in central Baghdad in the past year
500,000 Refugees expected to return
39m People living in the country by 2015, Government estimates
1.9m Extra housing units needed to satisfy growth
Iran slows atom plant growth but fuel stockpile rises
By Mark Heinrich
VIENNA (Reuters) - Iran has slowed the expansion of its uranium enrichment plant but has built up a stockpile of nuclear fuel, an International Atomic Energy Agency report said on Thursday.
The U.N. watchdog said Iran had increased the number of centrifuges refining uranium, a process that can produce fuel for civilian energy or atom bombs, by only 136 from 3,800 in November.
"We see the pace of installing and bringing centrifuges into operation has slowed quite considerably since August," a senior U.N. official said.
But Iran's reported stockpile of low-enriched uranium had risen to 1,010 kg from 630 kg in November and 480 kg in August. The heightened output rate suggested existing centrifuges were operating at higher capacity and more glitch-free than before.
The United States urged Iran to give up its enrichment activities and said Tehran's refusal to respond constructively to IAEA requests over its program was "deeply troubling."
"We view this report as another opportunity lost to resolve international concerns," U.S. State Department spokesman Gordon Duguid told reporters in Washington.
"Absent Iranian compliance with its international nuclear obligations and transparency with the IAEA, the international community cannot have confidence in the exclusively peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear program," he said.
Iran says it is producing nuclear fuel only for civil nuclear energy. Western powers, frustrated by restrictions on IAEA inspections, suspect otherwise.
Western non-proliferation analysts estimate from 1,000 to 1,700 kg would be needed as a basis for conversion into high-enriched uranium to make one bomb and Tehran could reach that threshold within a few months.
But it would take Iran another two to five years before it was capable of producing nuclear weapons, IAEA director Mohamed ElBaradei said this week.
The report said Iran was still boycotting IAEA inspectors looking into Western allegations of past covert atom bomb research.
OBAMA POLICY
As long as Iran continued to withhold access to documentation, Iranian officials and sites, the IAEA would be unable to verify whether Iranian nuclear activity was peaceful or not, it said.
Tehran says the mainly U.S. intelligence was forged.
Progress in the IAEA inquiry, which Iran regards as driven by U.S. pressure, looks unlikely before Iran sees what U.S. President Barack Obama has to offer under his offer of direct talks with adversaries. Continued...
VIENNA (Reuters) - Iran has slowed the expansion of its uranium enrichment plant but has built up a stockpile of nuclear fuel, an International Atomic Energy Agency report said on Thursday.
The U.N. watchdog said Iran had increased the number of centrifuges refining uranium, a process that can produce fuel for civilian energy or atom bombs, by only 136 from 3,800 in November.
"We see the pace of installing and bringing centrifuges into operation has slowed quite considerably since August," a senior U.N. official said.
But Iran's reported stockpile of low-enriched uranium had risen to 1,010 kg from 630 kg in November and 480 kg in August. The heightened output rate suggested existing centrifuges were operating at higher capacity and more glitch-free than before.
The United States urged Iran to give up its enrichment activities and said Tehran's refusal to respond constructively to IAEA requests over its program was "deeply troubling."
"We view this report as another opportunity lost to resolve international concerns," U.S. State Department spokesman Gordon Duguid told reporters in Washington.
"Absent Iranian compliance with its international nuclear obligations and transparency with the IAEA, the international community cannot have confidence in the exclusively peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear program," he said.
Iran says it is producing nuclear fuel only for civil nuclear energy. Western powers, frustrated by restrictions on IAEA inspections, suspect otherwise.
Western non-proliferation analysts estimate from 1,000 to 1,700 kg would be needed as a basis for conversion into high-enriched uranium to make one bomb and Tehran could reach that threshold within a few months.
But it would take Iran another two to five years before it was capable of producing nuclear weapons, IAEA director Mohamed ElBaradei said this week.
The report said Iran was still boycotting IAEA inspectors looking into Western allegations of past covert atom bomb research.
OBAMA POLICY
As long as Iran continued to withhold access to documentation, Iranian officials and sites, the IAEA would be unable to verify whether Iranian nuclear activity was peaceful or not, it said.
Tehran says the mainly U.S. intelligence was forged.
Progress in the IAEA inquiry, which Iran regards as driven by U.S. pressure, looks unlikely before Iran sees what U.S. President Barack Obama has to offer under his offer of direct talks with adversaries. Continued...
Reuters
Iran has enriched enough uranium to make bomb, IAEA says
UN nuclear watchdog's report says Iran appeared to have slowed
the rate at which enrichment capacity is expanding
The UN's nuclear watchdog reported today that Iran had managed to enrich a metric tonne of low enriched uranium (LEU), which UN officials say is technically enough to build a nuclear weapon.
UN officials cautioned that there remained many practical obstacles to the production of a bomb, and pointed out that the uranium was under close surveillance, and the report issued by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said Iran appeared to have slowed down the rate at which its uranium enrichment capacity is expanding. But the report is likely to raise further the already high tensions surrounding the Iranian nuclear programme.
One respected US analyst said that the tonne milestone meant that Iran had reached "breakout capacity" - the theoretical ability to produce the 20-25 kg highly enriched uranium needed for one functioning warhead. Others were more cautious but said there was plenty more in the report to raise the level of international concern.
The IAEA said that Iran had put a roof over a "heavy-water" nuclear reactor being built near the town of Arak, capable and was preventing agency inspectors from carrying out ground inspections, meaning that they no longer had any way of seeing what was being done at the facility, which could potentially produce plutonium.
Iran is also refusing to tell the IAEA where it is manufacturing the centrifuges used to enrich uranium, so the agency cannot confirm how many are being produced and where they are being installed.
In a separate report released at the same time, the IAEA said traces of uranium taken from the site of an alleged nuclear reactor in Syria were manmade and rejected the Syrian government's claim that the uranium had come from Israeli missiles used to destroy the site in 2007.
The report on the Dair Alzour site puts enormous pressure on Damascus as it rejects the Syrian explanation for the presence of uranium and denounces the government for its lack of cooperation with the agency's inquiry.
Together, the reports on Iran and Syria add greater urgency to international efforts to curb nuclear proliferation, and in particular, bring closer the possibility of a military confrontation between Iran and Israel, which has declared it will not tolerate Iran reaching nuclear weapons capability.
The IAEA report on Iran surprised many proliferation experts because, it recorded a dramatic jump in Iranian stockpiles of LEU at the enrichment plant at Natanz. In its last report in November, the IAEA estimated that Iran had produced 635 kg of LEU, based partly on Iranian government figures.
The agency now estimates that Iran had produced 839 kg of LEU by November, and that Iran had reported producing a further 171 kg in the following two months - a total of 1010 kg. The Iranian LEU has less than a 4% concentration of the fissile isotope Uranium 235. To make weapons grade HEU, with a concentration of 80-90%, it has to be further enriched, by being passed through massed 'cascades' of centrifuges.
"Do they have enough LEU to produce a 'significant quantity' of HEU [enough for a bomb]? Yes, if you count the U235 atoms then they do have a significant quantity of HEU," a senior official close to the IAEA said. "But it is theoretical and they would need to use their full capacity to do so. They are not there yet. If they were to build another clandestine facility, then that would be different."
The official added that: "The nuclear material has been under containment and surveillance at all times."
UN officials also stressed that the number of centrifuges at Natanz actually being used to enrich uranium had increased relatively little since the last report in November, from 3,800 to nearly 4,000. But it also found a roughly 1,500 additional centrifuges had been installed and were "under vacuum", a preparatory step before enrichment can start.
David Albright, a veteran UN weapons inspector, who now heads the independent Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) in Washington, gave a blunter assessment.
"They have reached a nuclear weapons breakout capability. You can dance about it, but they would have enough to make 20-25 kg of weapons-grade HEU," Albright said. "If they break out they will do it at a clandestine facility, not at Natanz, so you can't use Natanz as a measure of how fast they could do it. The Iranians have stopped telling the IAEA about the production of centrifuges … so the agency doesn't know how many they are making."
Another western analyst, speaking on condition of anonymity, argued that due to the wastage involved in making a first nuclear device, Iran would need a few more hundred kilograms of LEU to reach breakout capacity, but added that the country appeared "well on its way" to that milestone.
Daryl Kimball, the head of the Arms Control Association in Washington argued that Iran's LEU stockpile was not the most worrying aspect of the new IAEA report.
"The report shows that Iran is slowly amassing an LEU stockpile but that stockpile we must remember is safeguarded. Iran can't divert that quantity without being very obvious," Kimball said.
"What should be of concern is that the IAEA is becoming less able to provide an accurate picture of what is going on. We don't know where centrifuges are being manufactured and whether they are being delivered to Natanz or somewhere else. And we cannot remotely see what is happening at [a] heavy water facility under construction at Arak, and whether that is being used for peaceful purposes."
Guardian
The UN's nuclear watchdog reported today that Iran had managed to enrich a metric tonne of low enriched uranium (LEU), which UN officials say is technically enough to build a nuclear weapon.
UN officials cautioned that there remained many practical obstacles to the production of a bomb, and pointed out that the uranium was under close surveillance, and the report issued by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said Iran appeared to have slowed down the rate at which its uranium enrichment capacity is expanding. But the report is likely to raise further the already high tensions surrounding the Iranian nuclear programme.
One respected US analyst said that the tonne milestone meant that Iran had reached "breakout capacity" - the theoretical ability to produce the 20-25 kg highly enriched uranium needed for one functioning warhead. Others were more cautious but said there was plenty more in the report to raise the level of international concern.
The IAEA said that Iran had put a roof over a "heavy-water" nuclear reactor being built near the town of Arak, capable and was preventing agency inspectors from carrying out ground inspections, meaning that they no longer had any way of seeing what was being done at the facility, which could potentially produce plutonium.
Iran is also refusing to tell the IAEA where it is manufacturing the centrifuges used to enrich uranium, so the agency cannot confirm how many are being produced and where they are being installed.
In a separate report released at the same time, the IAEA said traces of uranium taken from the site of an alleged nuclear reactor in Syria were manmade and rejected the Syrian government's claim that the uranium had come from Israeli missiles used to destroy the site in 2007.
The report on the Dair Alzour site puts enormous pressure on Damascus as it rejects the Syrian explanation for the presence of uranium and denounces the government for its lack of cooperation with the agency's inquiry.
Together, the reports on Iran and Syria add greater urgency to international efforts to curb nuclear proliferation, and in particular, bring closer the possibility of a military confrontation between Iran and Israel, which has declared it will not tolerate Iran reaching nuclear weapons capability.
The IAEA report on Iran surprised many proliferation experts because, it recorded a dramatic jump in Iranian stockpiles of LEU at the enrichment plant at Natanz. In its last report in November, the IAEA estimated that Iran had produced 635 kg of LEU, based partly on Iranian government figures.
The agency now estimates that Iran had produced 839 kg of LEU by November, and that Iran had reported producing a further 171 kg in the following two months - a total of 1010 kg. The Iranian LEU has less than a 4% concentration of the fissile isotope Uranium 235. To make weapons grade HEU, with a concentration of 80-90%, it has to be further enriched, by being passed through massed 'cascades' of centrifuges.
"Do they have enough LEU to produce a 'significant quantity' of HEU [enough for a bomb]? Yes, if you count the U235 atoms then they do have a significant quantity of HEU," a senior official close to the IAEA said. "But it is theoretical and they would need to use their full capacity to do so. They are not there yet. If they were to build another clandestine facility, then that would be different."
The official added that: "The nuclear material has been under containment and surveillance at all times."
UN officials also stressed that the number of centrifuges at Natanz actually being used to enrich uranium had increased relatively little since the last report in November, from 3,800 to nearly 4,000. But it also found a roughly 1,500 additional centrifuges had been installed and were "under vacuum", a preparatory step before enrichment can start.
David Albright, a veteran UN weapons inspector, who now heads the independent Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) in Washington, gave a blunter assessment.
"They have reached a nuclear weapons breakout capability. You can dance about it, but they would have enough to make 20-25 kg of weapons-grade HEU," Albright said. "If they break out they will do it at a clandestine facility, not at Natanz, so you can't use Natanz as a measure of how fast they could do it. The Iranians have stopped telling the IAEA about the production of centrifuges … so the agency doesn't know how many they are making."
Another western analyst, speaking on condition of anonymity, argued that due to the wastage involved in making a first nuclear device, Iran would need a few more hundred kilograms of LEU to reach breakout capacity, but added that the country appeared "well on its way" to that milestone.
Daryl Kimball, the head of the Arms Control Association in Washington argued that Iran's LEU stockpile was not the most worrying aspect of the new IAEA report.
"The report shows that Iran is slowly amassing an LEU stockpile but that stockpile we must remember is safeguarded. Iran can't divert that quantity without being very obvious," Kimball said.
"What should be of concern is that the IAEA is becoming less able to provide an accurate picture of what is going on. We don't know where centrifuges are being manufactured and whether they are being delivered to Natanz or somewhere else. And we cannot remotely see what is happening at [a] heavy water facility under construction at Arak, and whether that is being used for peaceful purposes."
Monday, February 16, 2009
Seven friends face revolutionary court
Baha'is' rights have often been violated in Iran; now, as pressure mounts on the government, activists' lives are being threatened
Fariba is a 46-year-old psychologist and a mother of three. She graduated from high school with honours but was barred from attending university because of her religious beliefs. Her youngest daughter is 14. I know her through her son, who studied for postgraduate qualification in the UK. Mahvash, 55, was a school principal before she was dismissed from public education. Vahid, 37, is an optician. He has a nine-year-old son. I am a parent too. Parents need to be with their children, not separated from them on the basis of prejudice and hatred.
Fariba, Mahvash and Vahid, in the face of tremendous challenges, have devoted their lives to serving the people of their country. Along with four other ordinary, decent citizens of Iran, they made up the membership of an informal committee attending to the needs of the 300,000-strong Baha'i community, the country's largest non-Muslim religious minority, after its formal administrative institutions were disbanded in 1983. The authorities were fully aware of their activities and had informal dealings with them. One could even say that their demands on the community necessitated the existence of this informal Baha'i representation.
The "seven friends in Iran", as they were known, were arrested in dawn raids last spring. Since that time, they have been detained without charge in Tehran's notorious Evin prison. No evidence against them has been brought to light, and they have been denied access to their legal counsel, the Nobel peace prize laureate Shirin Ebadi, who has been threatened, intimidated, and vilified in the news media since taking on their case.
Along with four of their colleagues, their lives may now be in danger. This week, it has been reported, will see a case against them sent to the revolutionary court in Tehran. They are accused of "espionage for Israel, insulting religious sanctities and propaganda against the Islamic Republic".
Such spurious allegations against the Baha'is are not new – but they are extremely serious. Even during the years prior to 1979 under the Shah, history has sadly shown that when Iran feels threatened, it inflames deep-rooted prejudice against Baha'is and other religious minorities to mobilise mass support. The Iranian government is well aware that, as articles of faith, Baha'is honour Islam as a divine religion, are obedient to the laws of the land and do not engage in political activity. The presence of their world headquarters in modern-day Israel is an historical consequence of the Persian and Ottoman authorities themselves banishing the faith's founder to the penal colony of Acre, 80 years before the state of Israel was formed.
Sixty years after the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, this case alone belies a contemptuous, continuing abuse by a sovereign government against one of its minorities. While such targeted violations are taking place within the context of pressures over all civil society organisations in Iran – including students, journalists, women's rights activists, lawyers groups, health practitioners, trade unions, and even the British Council last week – those against the Baha'is give rise to particular concern because of the systematic pattern of violations that are so regularly been resuscitated against them.
Non-discrimination on the basis of religion is fundamental to human rights. Freedom of religion or belief was recognised in international law long before the declaration, in 1948. It was subsequently captured in article 18 of that document, and expounded in article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which the Islamic Republic of Iran has ratified. Non-discrimination is also upheld in tens of other international and regional standards, and indeed in Islamic law and custom as well. Freedom of religion or belief upholds the right of all, including the Baha'is in Iran, to have and to manifest the religion of their choice in worship, observance, practice and teaching. According to the 1981 UN declaration on the elimination of all forms of intolerance and discrimination based on religion or belief, this implies the possibility of observing Baha'i holy days, the full operation of community life, teaching and education of the Baha'i faith in Iran and the free choice of all to join or leave its membership, the communication of Baha'is with their co-religionists inside and outside Iran and their establishment of community and charitable institutions. More pertinent to this present case, the freedom to train, appoint, elect or designate leaders is recognised, with the objective of facilitating for religious groups the conduct of their affairs. Yet further rights accrue due to the fact that Baha'is constitute a minority community, and in order to facilitate their continuity, development and full participation in society.
All of this could, sadly, not be more distant from the daily reality of the lives of Iranian Baha'is. As a UN expert committee once noted, even the dead in Iran cannot rest in peace. Baha'i cemetery desecrations don't just go unheeded, they take place under government supervision. Over 200 articles in the Kayhan over the past two years have attacked every aspect of the faith's history, personalities, beliefs and community life. Such messages are reinforced on television, in mass marches and in Friday sermons. Under government tutelage, the media serves to endanger their already highly curtailed existence.
The Baha'is have found a degree of solace and relief from the growing number of expressions of solidarity they receive from Iranians in the diaspora and even within Iran, the vast majority of whom are Muslim. Recently, a group of Iranian intellectuals, promoters of justice and champions of freedom, published an open letter (pdf) in which they stated that, as Iranians, they were ashamed of the oppression perpetrated against Baha'is in their homeland.
Within Iran itself, where defiance of the ideology of the government risks dire consequences, there are increasing incidents of Iranian Muslims challenging the mistreatment of their Baha'i compatriots. Students and schoolchildren have protested at the expulsion of Baha'is from several educational institutions, part of a government-sanctioned policy to deny Baha'is access to education purely on grounds of their beliefs. Even senior figures in the Shia religious establishment, notably Grand Ayatollah Montazeri, have stated publicly that Baha'is should have the rights of citizens and to live in Iran.
Meanwhile, seven innocent people are among the many awaiting judgment in Iran on their fate. Far from being a threat to state security, the Baha'is of Iran are deeply committed to the peaceful and prosperous development of their country. The facts demonstrate that they are persecuted purely for their religious beliefs. Time and again, they have been offered their freedom – and in some cases, their lives – if they recant their faith and convert to Islam. For more than a century, Baha'is have preferred to face the most extreme punishment rather than deny the very principles that guide their lives. They should not, however, be required to make that choice.
Guadian
Fariba is a 46-year-old psychologist and a mother of three. She graduated from high school with honours but was barred from attending university because of her religious beliefs. Her youngest daughter is 14. I know her through her son, who studied for postgraduate qualification in the UK. Mahvash, 55, was a school principal before she was dismissed from public education. Vahid, 37, is an optician. He has a nine-year-old son. I am a parent too. Parents need to be with their children, not separated from them on the basis of prejudice and hatred.
Fariba, Mahvash and Vahid, in the face of tremendous challenges, have devoted their lives to serving the people of their country. Along with four other ordinary, decent citizens of Iran, they made up the membership of an informal committee attending to the needs of the 300,000-strong Baha'i community, the country's largest non-Muslim religious minority, after its formal administrative institutions were disbanded in 1983. The authorities were fully aware of their activities and had informal dealings with them. One could even say that their demands on the community necessitated the existence of this informal Baha'i representation.
The "seven friends in Iran", as they were known, were arrested in dawn raids last spring. Since that time, they have been detained without charge in Tehran's notorious Evin prison. No evidence against them has been brought to light, and they have been denied access to their legal counsel, the Nobel peace prize laureate Shirin Ebadi, who has been threatened, intimidated, and vilified in the news media since taking on their case.
Along with four of their colleagues, their lives may now be in danger. This week, it has been reported, will see a case against them sent to the revolutionary court in Tehran. They are accused of "espionage for Israel, insulting religious sanctities and propaganda against the Islamic Republic".
Such spurious allegations against the Baha'is are not new – but they are extremely serious. Even during the years prior to 1979 under the Shah, history has sadly shown that when Iran feels threatened, it inflames deep-rooted prejudice against Baha'is and other religious minorities to mobilise mass support. The Iranian government is well aware that, as articles of faith, Baha'is honour Islam as a divine religion, are obedient to the laws of the land and do not engage in political activity. The presence of their world headquarters in modern-day Israel is an historical consequence of the Persian and Ottoman authorities themselves banishing the faith's founder to the penal colony of Acre, 80 years before the state of Israel was formed.
Sixty years after the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, this case alone belies a contemptuous, continuing abuse by a sovereign government against one of its minorities. While such targeted violations are taking place within the context of pressures over all civil society organisations in Iran – including students, journalists, women's rights activists, lawyers groups, health practitioners, trade unions, and even the British Council last week – those against the Baha'is give rise to particular concern because of the systematic pattern of violations that are so regularly been resuscitated against them.
Non-discrimination on the basis of religion is fundamental to human rights. Freedom of religion or belief was recognised in international law long before the declaration, in 1948. It was subsequently captured in article 18 of that document, and expounded in article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which the Islamic Republic of Iran has ratified. Non-discrimination is also upheld in tens of other international and regional standards, and indeed in Islamic law and custom as well. Freedom of religion or belief upholds the right of all, including the Baha'is in Iran, to have and to manifest the religion of their choice in worship, observance, practice and teaching. According to the 1981 UN declaration on the elimination of all forms of intolerance and discrimination based on religion or belief, this implies the possibility of observing Baha'i holy days, the full operation of community life, teaching and education of the Baha'i faith in Iran and the free choice of all to join or leave its membership, the communication of Baha'is with their co-religionists inside and outside Iran and their establishment of community and charitable institutions. More pertinent to this present case, the freedom to train, appoint, elect or designate leaders is recognised, with the objective of facilitating for religious groups the conduct of their affairs. Yet further rights accrue due to the fact that Baha'is constitute a minority community, and in order to facilitate their continuity, development and full participation in society.
All of this could, sadly, not be more distant from the daily reality of the lives of Iranian Baha'is. As a UN expert committee once noted, even the dead in Iran cannot rest in peace. Baha'i cemetery desecrations don't just go unheeded, they take place under government supervision. Over 200 articles in the Kayhan over the past two years have attacked every aspect of the faith's history, personalities, beliefs and community life. Such messages are reinforced on television, in mass marches and in Friday sermons. Under government tutelage, the media serves to endanger their already highly curtailed existence.
The Baha'is have found a degree of solace and relief from the growing number of expressions of solidarity they receive from Iranians in the diaspora and even within Iran, the vast majority of whom are Muslim. Recently, a group of Iranian intellectuals, promoters of justice and champions of freedom, published an open letter (pdf) in which they stated that, as Iranians, they were ashamed of the oppression perpetrated against Baha'is in their homeland.
Within Iran itself, where defiance of the ideology of the government risks dire consequences, there are increasing incidents of Iranian Muslims challenging the mistreatment of their Baha'i compatriots. Students and schoolchildren have protested at the expulsion of Baha'is from several educational institutions, part of a government-sanctioned policy to deny Baha'is access to education purely on grounds of their beliefs. Even senior figures in the Shia religious establishment, notably Grand Ayatollah Montazeri, have stated publicly that Baha'is should have the rights of citizens and to live in Iran.
Meanwhile, seven innocent people are among the many awaiting judgment in Iran on their fate. Far from being a threat to state security, the Baha'is of Iran are deeply committed to the peaceful and prosperous development of their country. The facts demonstrate that they are persecuted purely for their religious beliefs. Time and again, they have been offered their freedom – and in some cases, their lives – if they recant their faith and convert to Islam. For more than a century, Baha'is have preferred to face the most extreme punishment rather than deny the very principles that guide their lives. They should not, however, be required to make that choice.
Iran: Four Journalists Sentenced to Prison, Floggings
(New York) - The sentencing of four Tehran bloggers by Iran's Judiciary Court on February 3, 2009, to prison terms, fines and flogging, despite the head of the judiciary's admission that they had been coerced into confessing, violates their right to a fair trial, Human Rights Watch and the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran said today. The four said shortly after their arrest in 2004 that they had been tortured during interrogation, but there has been no public investigation into these allegations despite a high-level promise to do so.Authorities arrested Omid Memarian, Roozbeh Mirebrahimi, Shahram Rafizadeh, and Javad Gholamtamimi in September and October 2004, and detained them without charge. The four said that they were subjected in detention to physical and psychological abuse, as well as prolonged periods of solitary confinement in a secret detention center without access to counsel or family. Three of the men subsequently described the abuse at a meeting with Ayatollah Mahmoud Hashemi Shahroudi, the head of the judiciary. On April 20, 2005, a judiciary spokesman said that an official investigation confirmed that their confessions had been coerced. "The interrogators and prosecutors committed a series of negligent and careless acts in this case that led to the abuse of the detainees' words and writings in producing confession letters," the spokesman said.
"These sentences are shocking, given that the head of the judiciary himself admitted the evidence had been obtained by coercion" said Joe Stork, deputy director of the Middle East division at Human Rights Watch. "The judges should be investigating and prosecuting abusers, not their victims."
Human Rights Watch and the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran called on the Tehran Appeals Court to overturn the sentences, and on the government to investigate the torture claims.
The four journalists were released on bail in late 2004. Memarian, Mirebrahimi, and Rafizadeh subsequently left Iran and are living abroad. Gholamtamimi resides in Iran.
Judiciary authorities informed lawyers for the four on February 4 that Branch 1059 of Tehran's Judiciary Court sentenced them each to prison terms of up to three years and three months, and to be flogged. Memarian was also fined 500,000 tomans (US$520). The known charges against them include "participating in the establishment of illegal organizations," "membership in illegal organizations," "propaganda against the state," "disseminating lies," and "disturbing public order." Gholamtamimi was also charged with treason.
The lawyers for the four include the Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Shirin Ebadi, who told Human Rights Watch and the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran that they would "definitely appeal" the sentences.
Memarian, Mirebrahimi, and Rafizadeh met with Ayatollah Shahroudi on January 10, 2005, and described physical and psychological torture at the hands of a specific interrogator, whom they said identified himself as "Keshavarz" (farmer). They said the magistrate in charge was known as "Mehdipour." The apparent purpose of the abuse was to extract confessions that implicate reformist politicians and civil society activists in activities such as spying and violating national security laws (http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2004/12/19/iran-judiciary-uses-coercion-cover-torture ). According to the three men, both the interrogator and the magistrate repeatedly delivered messages and threats to the detainees on behalf of the chief prosecutor of Tehran. Shahroudi's spokesman announced on January 12, 2005 that, "Shahroudi has issued a special order to investigate and probe these [detentions]. If any of the detainees' allegations, at any level, are true then we will prosecute the violators." To date, the government has not made the full findings of any investigation public, nor has it announced any penalties or prosecution for the abuse.
"Either the Iranian judges are not listening to Ayatollah Shahroudi, or he has reneged on his promise to investigate the torturers and not the bloggers," said Hadi Ghaemi, coordinator of the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran. "These brave journalists stood up for their rights. It's high time the Iranian judiciary stood up for justice."
Human Rights Watch and the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran have documented extensive patterns of forced confessions, arbitrary detentions, and prison torture against opposition political activists, journalists, and anyone perceived as a critic. (http://www.hrw.org/en/reports/2008/01/06/you-can-detain-anyone-anything-0 )
Human Rights Watch
Sunday, February 15, 2009
5 die in central Iran plane crash
Five people have been killed when a plane on a training flight crashed near an airport in Iran's central province of Isfahan.
According to a report by Fars News Agency, an instructor pilot and four other pilots-in-training were among the dead.
Further inquiry has been launched into the accident; however, the cause of the crash remains unknown.
The report provided no further details on the fatal incident.
According to a report by Fars News Agency, an instructor pilot and four other pilots-in-training were among the dead.
Further inquiry has been launched into the accident; however, the cause of the crash remains unknown.
The report provided no further details on the fatal incident.
Iran Press News
Iran Official To Us: Chess Better Game Than Boxing
TEHRAN, Iran: When it comes to dealing with Iran, the country's parliamentary speaker said the United States would be better served taking up chess than continuing to box, the country's official news agency reported Saturday.
His comments come at a time when the new administration of President Barack Obama has signaled a new willingness to engage Iran, whose relations with the previous administration were long strained. Obama last week pledged to rethink Washington's relationship with Tehran.
"The United States needs to play on a chess set (with Iran) instead of playing in a boxing ring," IRNA quoted Ali Larijani as telling a group of visiting reporters in Tehran Saturday.
And at his inauguration last month, Obama said his administration would reach out to rival states, saying "we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist."
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has responded by saying Iran would welcome talks with the United States — but only if there was mutual respect.
Iranian officials have said that would mean that the United States needs to stop making "baseless" accusations against the Islamic Republic in order to pave the way for talks between the two longtime adversaries. The U.S. accuses Iran of supporting terrorism and secretly seeking to build nuclear weapons — charges Iran denies.
Larijani, a conservative close to Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said actions by the United States were creating obstacles in the way of any rapprochment. Specifically, he said the U.S. has supported Iranian terrorist groups, disrespected Iran's rights and has repeatedly charged that Iran is seeking an atomic bomb.
Iran has accused the United States of secretly supporting the People's Mujahedeen, an organization dedicated to the overthrow of the Iranian government. The U.S. denies this and also considers the organization a terrorist group.
Larijani the problems between the two countries couldn't just be resolved "through words. There is a need for action. The U.S. needs to change the way it behaves toward the Iranian nation."
Iranian officials have long argued that no talks will succeed unless Washington deals with Iran as an equal party and not seeking to impose its will on the Persian nation.
Meanwhile, Gen. David Petraeus said Saturday at a forum in Doha, Qatar that the U.S. is looking for signs that Iran is willing to cooperate, but he warned Iran should stop backing extremist groups that contribute to ongoing violence in Iraq, adding that the U.S. is watching Tehran "very, very closely."
The U.S. commander of the region that includes both countries was firm when asked at a U.S.-Islamic world forum what concrete steps Iran could take to improve relations. Foremost on his list was that there be an end to the "training, equipping, funding of extremist elements" in the region, particularly in Iraq.
"One of the elements fueling that violence was indeed the assistance provided by Iran," he continued. "There is absolutely no question about this, and there is also no question that some of this does continue to this day."
Iran has denied supporting extremist groups in Iraq.
The United States and Iran severed relations after the 1979 Iranian Revolution and the takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran by hard-line Iranian students.
Relations deteriorated even further after the Sept. 11 attacks when former President George W. Bush declared Iran belonged to an "axis of evil," along with Iraq and North Korea. Ahmadinejad widened that gap after he was elected in 2005 and defied the U.S. and its allies by pursuing Iran's controversial nuclear program.
Ap The Associated Press
His comments come at a time when the new administration of President Barack Obama has signaled a new willingness to engage Iran, whose relations with the previous administration were long strained. Obama last week pledged to rethink Washington's relationship with Tehran.
"The United States needs to play on a chess set (with Iran) instead of playing in a boxing ring," IRNA quoted Ali Larijani as telling a group of visiting reporters in Tehran Saturday.
And at his inauguration last month, Obama said his administration would reach out to rival states, saying "we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist."
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has responded by saying Iran would welcome talks with the United States — but only if there was mutual respect.
Iranian officials have said that would mean that the United States needs to stop making "baseless" accusations against the Islamic Republic in order to pave the way for talks between the two longtime adversaries. The U.S. accuses Iran of supporting terrorism and secretly seeking to build nuclear weapons — charges Iran denies.
Larijani, a conservative close to Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said actions by the United States were creating obstacles in the way of any rapprochment. Specifically, he said the U.S. has supported Iranian terrorist groups, disrespected Iran's rights and has repeatedly charged that Iran is seeking an atomic bomb.
Iran has accused the United States of secretly supporting the People's Mujahedeen, an organization dedicated to the overthrow of the Iranian government. The U.S. denies this and also considers the organization a terrorist group.
Larijani the problems between the two countries couldn't just be resolved "through words. There is a need for action. The U.S. needs to change the way it behaves toward the Iranian nation."
Iranian officials have long argued that no talks will succeed unless Washington deals with Iran as an equal party and not seeking to impose its will on the Persian nation.
Meanwhile, Gen. David Petraeus said Saturday at a forum in Doha, Qatar that the U.S. is looking for signs that Iran is willing to cooperate, but he warned Iran should stop backing extremist groups that contribute to ongoing violence in Iraq, adding that the U.S. is watching Tehran "very, very closely."
The U.S. commander of the region that includes both countries was firm when asked at a U.S.-Islamic world forum what concrete steps Iran could take to improve relations. Foremost on his list was that there be an end to the "training, equipping, funding of extremist elements" in the region, particularly in Iraq.
"One of the elements fueling that violence was indeed the assistance provided by Iran," he continued. "There is absolutely no question about this, and there is also no question that some of this does continue to this day."
Iran has denied supporting extremist groups in Iraq.
The United States and Iran severed relations after the 1979 Iranian Revolution and the takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran by hard-line Iranian students.
Relations deteriorated even further after the Sept. 11 attacks when former President George W. Bush declared Iran belonged to an "axis of evil," along with Iraq and North Korea. Ahmadinejad widened that gap after he was elected in 2005 and defied the U.S. and its allies by pursuing Iran's controversial nuclear program.
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Iran: hungry for freedom
TEHRAN: The young Revolutionary Guardsman in his light tan uniform was all smiles. "I had longed to see a real American," he said, extending a hand.
We were standing near the shrine to Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the inspiration of the Islamic Revolution whose defense is the mission of the powerful Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps.
"And, what do you think?"
"On the surface, great," Mohammad Piri, 21, said. "But your government has done things that make me pessimistic."
Thirty years of noncommunication create a lot of mistrust. The mistaken U.S. shooting down in 1988 of an Iran Air Airbus with 290 people aboard is often cited. Conspiracy theories abound. That the radical Sunni Taliban was an American creation designed to discomfort Shiite Iran is a near universal conviction.Another Guardsman, Jaafar Dehghani, 22, stepped forward. "We can defend our soil with an M-1 rifle," he said. "We have God on our side." He pointed to the hundreds of thousands of graves of young soldiers killed defending Khomeini's Islamic Republic in the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war. "If I'd been alive then, I'd be lying here."
Iran, on the 30th anniversary of the Islamic Revolution, is full of defiance and suspicion of President Obama's motives in reaching out to Tehran. But it is equally full of longing. Most people are under 30 and, like these soldiers, they thirst for contact with the outside world and, above all, an America that looms with all the power of myth.
The Great Satan is great also in its power to exert fascination. "Death to America" has become background noise, as interesting as piped elevator music.
The revolution freed Iranians from the brutality of the Shah's secret police, Savak, and delivered a home-grown society modeled on the tenets of Islam in place of one pliant to America's whim. But like all revolutions, it has also disappointed. Freedom has ebbed and flowed since 1979. Of late, it has ebbed.
Beneath the hijab, that is to say beneath the surface of things, frustrations multiply. Women sometimes raise their hands to their necks to express a feeling of suffocation. Hard-pressed men, working 12-hour days to make enough to get by, are prone to hysterical laughter with its hint of desperation.
Competing pressures bear down on President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and behind him the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. They know that with unemployment at 14 percent (and rising), inflation at about 25 percent, oil revenues set to plunge by about two-thirds this year, and the country's oil and gas infrastructure in desperate need of modernization, opening to the West and its technology makes sense.
They also know Iran is composed of two worlds: the surface and the subterranean. The former is placid; the latter is hungry for more of the freedom the revolution promised. This, too, speaks for an engagement that might over time end Iran's bipolar state.
On the other hand, a revolutionary government that deprives itself of its great enemy is one that has lost the core of its galvanizing propaganda. Opening equals risk.
This is the background to Ahmadinejad's offer to "hold talks based on mutual respect" with a United States he continued to criticize. It came in response to Obama's best statement on Iran to date - one devoid of threats and one that spoke of the dangers, but not the unacceptability, of a nuclear Iran.
Mutual respect, a phrase Obama also used, begins with that. As Iranians often note, carrots and sticks are for donkeys.
The young soldiers pointed to how the United States backed Saddam Hussein in the Iran-Iraq war, another indication of American perfidy. "Everyone was with Saddam," Dehghani said. "Except Syria," I suggested, which prompted a guffaw.
"The Arabs are chickens," he said. "Just look at what Egypt did about Gaza. Those big-bellied Arabs, you take up a stick and they run away."
Scratch the surface and there's no love lost between Persians and Arabs, another reason to be careful in distinguishing Iranian rhetoric, which can seem monolithic, from Iran's many-shaded reality.
Dehghani offered me a bowl of Ash, a soup of noodles, chickpeas and vegetables. "Why not try to do something about your own country rather than going around the world waging war?" he asked.
I told him I thought Obama was trying to do just that. Then he told me his father wanted him to stay in the Revolutionary Guards because there's money to be made - Ahmadinejad has channeled funds and jobs their way - but he was more interested in starting his own business.
That's typical enough. Iranians are property-buying, car-mad, entrepreneurial consumers with a taste for the latest brands. Forget about nukes. Think Nikes.
We were standing near the shrine to Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the inspiration of the Islamic Revolution whose defense is the mission of the powerful Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps.
"And, what do you think?"
"On the surface, great," Mohammad Piri, 21, said. "But your government has done things that make me pessimistic."
Thirty years of noncommunication create a lot of mistrust. The mistaken U.S. shooting down in 1988 of an Iran Air Airbus with 290 people aboard is often cited. Conspiracy theories abound. That the radical Sunni Taliban was an American creation designed to discomfort Shiite Iran is a near universal conviction.Another Guardsman, Jaafar Dehghani, 22, stepped forward. "We can defend our soil with an M-1 rifle," he said. "We have God on our side." He pointed to the hundreds of thousands of graves of young soldiers killed defending Khomeini's Islamic Republic in the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war. "If I'd been alive then, I'd be lying here."
Iran, on the 30th anniversary of the Islamic Revolution, is full of defiance and suspicion of President Obama's motives in reaching out to Tehran. But it is equally full of longing. Most people are under 30 and, like these soldiers, they thirst for contact with the outside world and, above all, an America that looms with all the power of myth.
The Great Satan is great also in its power to exert fascination. "Death to America" has become background noise, as interesting as piped elevator music.
The revolution freed Iranians from the brutality of the Shah's secret police, Savak, and delivered a home-grown society modeled on the tenets of Islam in place of one pliant to America's whim. But like all revolutions, it has also disappointed. Freedom has ebbed and flowed since 1979. Of late, it has ebbed.
Beneath the hijab, that is to say beneath the surface of things, frustrations multiply. Women sometimes raise their hands to their necks to express a feeling of suffocation. Hard-pressed men, working 12-hour days to make enough to get by, are prone to hysterical laughter with its hint of desperation.
Competing pressures bear down on President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and behind him the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. They know that with unemployment at 14 percent (and rising), inflation at about 25 percent, oil revenues set to plunge by about two-thirds this year, and the country's oil and gas infrastructure in desperate need of modernization, opening to the West and its technology makes sense.
They also know Iran is composed of two worlds: the surface and the subterranean. The former is placid; the latter is hungry for more of the freedom the revolution promised. This, too, speaks for an engagement that might over time end Iran's bipolar state.
On the other hand, a revolutionary government that deprives itself of its great enemy is one that has lost the core of its galvanizing propaganda. Opening equals risk.
This is the background to Ahmadinejad's offer to "hold talks based on mutual respect" with a United States he continued to criticize. It came in response to Obama's best statement on Iran to date - one devoid of threats and one that spoke of the dangers, but not the unacceptability, of a nuclear Iran.
Mutual respect, a phrase Obama also used, begins with that. As Iranians often note, carrots and sticks are for donkeys.
The young soldiers pointed to how the United States backed Saddam Hussein in the Iran-Iraq war, another indication of American perfidy. "Everyone was with Saddam," Dehghani said. "Except Syria," I suggested, which prompted a guffaw.
"The Arabs are chickens," he said. "Just look at what Egypt did about Gaza. Those big-bellied Arabs, you take up a stick and they run away."
Scratch the surface and there's no love lost between Persians and Arabs, another reason to be careful in distinguishing Iranian rhetoric, which can seem monolithic, from Iran's many-shaded reality.
Dehghani offered me a bowl of Ash, a soup of noodles, chickpeas and vegetables. "Why not try to do something about your own country rather than going around the world waging war?" he asked.
I told him I thought Obama was trying to do just that. Then he told me his father wanted him to stay in the Revolutionary Guards because there's money to be made - Ahmadinejad has channeled funds and jobs their way - but he was more interested in starting his own business.
That's typical enough. Iranians are property-buying, car-mad, entrepreneurial consumers with a taste for the latest brands. Forget about nukes. Think Nikes.
A few days after this meeting, I found myself on the Tehran subway. A bunch of youths started smiling and pointing. "This guy's an American!" they exclaimed. There was no menace, only curiosity.
A young woman in a black hijab was standing near me. Abruptly, she looked me straight in the eye and said in English: "Where are you from?"
"New York."
"Oh." And she smiled.
America, think again about Iran.
International Herald Tribune
A young woman in a black hijab was standing near me. Abruptly, she looked me straight in the eye and said in English: "Where are you from?"
"New York."
"Oh." And she smiled.
America, think again about Iran.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Better relations with Iran might mean trouble with Israel for U.S.
TEHRAN: An offer by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran to take up President Barack Obama's oft-repeated invitation for direct talks between the United States and Iran signals the start of a long-delayed war-or-peace drama that may help define the Obama administration's plans to remake America's approach to diplomacy.
But it also opens up the possibility of new tensions with Israel, which less than a year ago sought American help in preparing an attack on Iran's main nuclear facility and is expected to drift further to the right after the parliamentary elections Tuesday. And Obama will have to decide whether to continue a major covert program against Iran's nuclear ambitions, even while beginning to engage in diplomacy.
Ahmadinejad promised Tuesday that if the United States was truly serious about changing the countries' relations, then Iran was ready to respond in kind. "It is clear that change should be fundamental, not tactical, and our people welcome real changes," he said. "Our nation is ready to hold talks based on mutual respect and in a fair atmosphere."
Three weeks ago, Obama promised in his Inaugural Address a new relationship with nations willing to "unclench" their fists, an offer he repeated at his news conference on Monday evening.
It is too early to know quite how to read Ahmadinejad's response.He coupled his offer of talks with an attack on the former U.S. president, George W. Bush, calling for him to be "tried and punished" for his policies and actions in the Middle East and the Gulf region.
It is also never exactly clear who is running Iran's foreign policy, and there is good reason to question whether the country's fiery president will overcome his mismanagement of the economy to survive the June 12 elections.
Yet analysts note that, for all his harsh words, Ahmadinejad has sent a surprising number of positive signals to the United States in recent years. He sent a letter to Bush in 2006 and a letter to Obama congratulating him on his election victory, and he has traveled four times to New York since he took office to take part in United Nations meetings.
"Generally speaking, Iran favors ties with the United States because falling oil prices have hurt its economy dramatically," said Saeed Leylaz, an economist and political analyst in Tehran. "The United States needs to take the first major step, otherwise Iran cannot go any farther," he said. But he cautioned that the United States should hold direct talks only with Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's supreme religious leader.
There is no question that a new dynamic is afoot, one that seems likely to become even more complicated after the election in Israel is settled. If the government that emerges is even more determined to end the Iranian nuclear program by any means necessary, Obama may find himself trying to negotiate with one of America's most determined adversaries while restraining one of its closest allies.
"I could draw you a scenario in which this new combination of players leads to the first real talks with Iran in three decades," one of the key players on the issue for Obama said last week, declining to speak on the record because the new administration had not even named its team, much less its strategy. "And I could draw you one in which the first big foreign crisis of the Obama presidency is a really nasty confrontation, either because the Israelis strike or because we won't let them."
In public, Obama is talking only about the first possibility. On Monday evening, he talked about "looking at areas where we can have constructive dialogue, where we can engage directly with them," and said he was looking for "diplomatic overtures." But he cautioned that "there's been a lot of mistrust built up over the years" and that after 30 years of a deep freeze, openings are "not going to happen overnight."
To protect his right flank, Obama quickly added the caveat that Iran should know that "we find the funding of terrorist organizations unacceptable" and that "a nuclear Iran could set off a nuclear arms race in the region that would be profoundly destabilizing."
But curiously, he did not repeat the warning he made repeatedly during the campaign, that he would never allow Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon, or even the nuclear fuel and capability to build one.
Whether this comes to anything, or founders on the question of Iran's race to enrich more uranium even while the two presidents circle each other, is anyone's guess. But it is bound to make the new government in Israel nervous, and the clock in Jerusalem is ticking a lot faster on the Iranian nuclear problem than it is in Washington.As The New York Times reported last month, a little less than a year ago the Israeli government came to Bush seeking bunker-busting bombs, refueling capability and overflight rights over Iraq to strike Iran's main nuclear enrichment plant, at Natanz. Bush - who elevated pre-emption to a doctrine and declared he would never allow Iran to develop the capability to build a nuclear weapon - turned the Israelis down.
Bush told the Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert, now in his last days in office, to wait, giving a new American covert effort to disable the Natanz facility time to work. Reluctantly, the Israelis agreed, and when the Bush administration disbanded last month, it was still unclear whether Olmert had really intended to go ahead with the attack or was just bluffing in an effort to force the United States to deal with the problem.
Now comes the replay, this time with some new players.
Over the weekend, Vice President Joseph Biden Jr. offered up the warning that Obama sidestepped on Monday night: If Iran stays on its current course, sanctions will intensify. The subtext of the Israeli election has been even clearer: To various degrees, all the candidates have made clear they plan to take on not only Hamas, but its Iranian sponsors.
And in Iran itself, the race for the presidency has been energized by the announcement over the weekend by former President Mohammad Khatami, the reformist who never mustered the power or the will to carry out much reform, that he wants his old job back. Presumably, that is a relief to Washington, which desperately wants to see Ahmadinejad sent to an early and permanent retirement, and with him Iran's proclamations about Israel's eventual destruction and America's inevitable decline.
But it was under Khatami, the reformer, that the expansion of Iran's nuclear ambitions blossomed. If the latest National Intelligence Estimate on Iran's nuclear ambitions is correct, the push to develop a weapons design, and the suspension of that effort in 2003, all happened on his watch. Iran contends that its nuclear program is solely for energy production, but Israel and many Western countries, including the United States, say the program is just a cover for attempts to build a bomb.
Obama's task over the next few months will be to demonstrate that he can simultaneously make progress with the Iranians and buy a little time from the Israelis. That will require some hard decisions, first among them whether the United States will stick to its insistence that the entire nuclear infrastructure in Iran, down to the last centrifuge, be dismantled.
It is almost inconceivable, some of Obama's aides acknowledge, that the Iranians will be willing to give up everything needed to produce a weapon. And it is hard to imagine that the Israelis will settle for anything less.
By Nazila Fathi and David E. Sanger
February 11, 2009
Herald Tribune
But it also opens up the possibility of new tensions with Israel, which less than a year ago sought American help in preparing an attack on Iran's main nuclear facility and is expected to drift further to the right after the parliamentary elections Tuesday. And Obama will have to decide whether to continue a major covert program against Iran's nuclear ambitions, even while beginning to engage in diplomacy.
Ahmadinejad promised Tuesday that if the United States was truly serious about changing the countries' relations, then Iran was ready to respond in kind. "It is clear that change should be fundamental, not tactical, and our people welcome real changes," he said. "Our nation is ready to hold talks based on mutual respect and in a fair atmosphere."
Three weeks ago, Obama promised in his Inaugural Address a new relationship with nations willing to "unclench" their fists, an offer he repeated at his news conference on Monday evening.
It is too early to know quite how to read Ahmadinejad's response.He coupled his offer of talks with an attack on the former U.S. president, George W. Bush, calling for him to be "tried and punished" for his policies and actions in the Middle East and the Gulf region.
It is also never exactly clear who is running Iran's foreign policy, and there is good reason to question whether the country's fiery president will overcome his mismanagement of the economy to survive the June 12 elections.
Yet analysts note that, for all his harsh words, Ahmadinejad has sent a surprising number of positive signals to the United States in recent years. He sent a letter to Bush in 2006 and a letter to Obama congratulating him on his election victory, and he has traveled four times to New York since he took office to take part in United Nations meetings.
"Generally speaking, Iran favors ties with the United States because falling oil prices have hurt its economy dramatically," said Saeed Leylaz, an economist and political analyst in Tehran. "The United States needs to take the first major step, otherwise Iran cannot go any farther," he said. But he cautioned that the United States should hold direct talks only with Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's supreme religious leader.
There is no question that a new dynamic is afoot, one that seems likely to become even more complicated after the election in Israel is settled. If the government that emerges is even more determined to end the Iranian nuclear program by any means necessary, Obama may find himself trying to negotiate with one of America's most determined adversaries while restraining one of its closest allies.
"I could draw you a scenario in which this new combination of players leads to the first real talks with Iran in three decades," one of the key players on the issue for Obama said last week, declining to speak on the record because the new administration had not even named its team, much less its strategy. "And I could draw you one in which the first big foreign crisis of the Obama presidency is a really nasty confrontation, either because the Israelis strike or because we won't let them."
In public, Obama is talking only about the first possibility. On Monday evening, he talked about "looking at areas where we can have constructive dialogue, where we can engage directly with them," and said he was looking for "diplomatic overtures." But he cautioned that "there's been a lot of mistrust built up over the years" and that after 30 years of a deep freeze, openings are "not going to happen overnight."
To protect his right flank, Obama quickly added the caveat that Iran should know that "we find the funding of terrorist organizations unacceptable" and that "a nuclear Iran could set off a nuclear arms race in the region that would be profoundly destabilizing."
But curiously, he did not repeat the warning he made repeatedly during the campaign, that he would never allow Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon, or even the nuclear fuel and capability to build one.
Whether this comes to anything, or founders on the question of Iran's race to enrich more uranium even while the two presidents circle each other, is anyone's guess. But it is bound to make the new government in Israel nervous, and the clock in Jerusalem is ticking a lot faster on the Iranian nuclear problem than it is in Washington.As The New York Times reported last month, a little less than a year ago the Israeli government came to Bush seeking bunker-busting bombs, refueling capability and overflight rights over Iraq to strike Iran's main nuclear enrichment plant, at Natanz. Bush - who elevated pre-emption to a doctrine and declared he would never allow Iran to develop the capability to build a nuclear weapon - turned the Israelis down.
Bush told the Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert, now in his last days in office, to wait, giving a new American covert effort to disable the Natanz facility time to work. Reluctantly, the Israelis agreed, and when the Bush administration disbanded last month, it was still unclear whether Olmert had really intended to go ahead with the attack or was just bluffing in an effort to force the United States to deal with the problem.
Now comes the replay, this time with some new players.
Over the weekend, Vice President Joseph Biden Jr. offered up the warning that Obama sidestepped on Monday night: If Iran stays on its current course, sanctions will intensify. The subtext of the Israeli election has been even clearer: To various degrees, all the candidates have made clear they plan to take on not only Hamas, but its Iranian sponsors.
And in Iran itself, the race for the presidency has been energized by the announcement over the weekend by former President Mohammad Khatami, the reformist who never mustered the power or the will to carry out much reform, that he wants his old job back. Presumably, that is a relief to Washington, which desperately wants to see Ahmadinejad sent to an early and permanent retirement, and with him Iran's proclamations about Israel's eventual destruction and America's inevitable decline.
But it was under Khatami, the reformer, that the expansion of Iran's nuclear ambitions blossomed. If the latest National Intelligence Estimate on Iran's nuclear ambitions is correct, the push to develop a weapons design, and the suspension of that effort in 2003, all happened on his watch. Iran contends that its nuclear program is solely for energy production, but Israel and many Western countries, including the United States, say the program is just a cover for attempts to build a bomb.
Obama's task over the next few months will be to demonstrate that he can simultaneously make progress with the Iranians and buy a little time from the Israelis. That will require some hard decisions, first among them whether the United States will stick to its insistence that the entire nuclear infrastructure in Iran, down to the last centrifuge, be dismantled.
It is almost inconceivable, some of Obama's aides acknowledge, that the Iranians will be willing to give up everything needed to produce a weapon. And it is hard to imagine that the Israelis will settle for anything less.
By Nazila Fathi and David E. Sanger
February 11, 2009
Herald Tribune
New Questions about Ex-FBI Agent Missing in Iran
Is Iran holding Robert Levinson as a potential bargaining chip with the United States?
By Alex Kingsbury
Robert Levinson spent more than 20 years in the FBI tracking down the usual suspects, from forgers and drug dealers to Russian mobsters. But it was his work as a private eye, ostensibly on the trail of cigarette smugglers, that got him into trouble.
The former G-man vanished under mysterious circumstances nearly two years ago while on the Iranian island of Kish in the Persian Gulf. A growing number of people in Washington, including some lawmakers, suspect he is being held by Iranian authorities, perhaps as a bargaining chip. If so, the Levinson case could provide an olive branch—or become a time bomb—for relations between Tehran and Washington, just as the Obama administration is hoping for a fresh start in dealing with Iran.
Iran has a record of hostage-taking—most famously 52 Americans during the Iranian revolution in 1979. In 2007, the Iranians seized a group of British sailors on patrol near Iranian waters and an Iranian-American scholar visiting her 93-year-old mother (all later released), and, perhaps, Robert Levinson.
It's a case that's long on speculation and short on facts, and it has largely flown under the public's radar. But it received an emotional airing February 3 when Levinson's eldest daughter Susan, tears streaming down her face, called on Tehran to at least acknowledge that her father is alive. "We're in so much pain living without him," she said at a Capitol news conference with other family members.
Tehran says publicly that it has no information about Levinson, though Iran's state-affiliated television in April 2007 said he was being detained. U.S. intelligence and law enforcement officials say unofficial Iranian contacts have implied his imprisonment by raising the idea of a prisoner swap for several alleged Iranian spies—suspected members of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guard Corps—captured by the U.S. military in the Iraqi city of Arbil just weeks before Levinson vanished.
Just who Levinson's clients were and why he was in Iran remain among the many publicly unanswered questions. His wife, Christine, says that it was her husband's first Mideast trip. She says he met a man named Daoud Salahuddin as part of an investigation into cigarette smuggling, which is a billion-dollar business for both the Revolutionary Guard and the Russian mob. Levinson disappeared from his hotel shortly thereafter.
The alleged Salahuddin connection adds a further plot twist. He once went by the name David Belfield and, in 1980, by his own account, gunned down a leading Iranian dissident in Bethesda, Md., at the behest of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's regime. He then fled to Iran, where he has been living ever since, though there are rumors that he is disillusioned with the regime and is trying to return to the United States (where he is under a 1981 indictment for the assassination).
The FBI has been investigating Levinson's disappearance, but officials are not saying anything publicly. Florida Sen. Bill Nelson says he believes Levinson is being held in a secret Iranian prison, though he hasn't offered evidence to support his claim. Because Iran and the United States haven't had formal relations since the 1979 hostage taking, the two speak through Swiss intermediaries, though there's been no progress on this case.
http://www.usnews.com
Iran Press News
By Alex Kingsbury
Robert Levinson spent more than 20 years in the FBI tracking down the usual suspects, from forgers and drug dealers to Russian mobsters. But it was his work as a private eye, ostensibly on the trail of cigarette smugglers, that got him into trouble.
The former G-man vanished under mysterious circumstances nearly two years ago while on the Iranian island of Kish in the Persian Gulf. A growing number of people in Washington, including some lawmakers, suspect he is being held by Iranian authorities, perhaps as a bargaining chip. If so, the Levinson case could provide an olive branch—or become a time bomb—for relations between Tehran and Washington, just as the Obama administration is hoping for a fresh start in dealing with Iran.
Iran has a record of hostage-taking—most famously 52 Americans during the Iranian revolution in 1979. In 2007, the Iranians seized a group of British sailors on patrol near Iranian waters and an Iranian-American scholar visiting her 93-year-old mother (all later released), and, perhaps, Robert Levinson.
It's a case that's long on speculation and short on facts, and it has largely flown under the public's radar. But it received an emotional airing February 3 when Levinson's eldest daughter Susan, tears streaming down her face, called on Tehran to at least acknowledge that her father is alive. "We're in so much pain living without him," she said at a Capitol news conference with other family members.
Tehran says publicly that it has no information about Levinson, though Iran's state-affiliated television in April 2007 said he was being detained. U.S. intelligence and law enforcement officials say unofficial Iranian contacts have implied his imprisonment by raising the idea of a prisoner swap for several alleged Iranian spies—suspected members of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guard Corps—captured by the U.S. military in the Iraqi city of Arbil just weeks before Levinson vanished.
Just who Levinson's clients were and why he was in Iran remain among the many publicly unanswered questions. His wife, Christine, says that it was her husband's first Mideast trip. She says he met a man named Daoud Salahuddin as part of an investigation into cigarette smuggling, which is a billion-dollar business for both the Revolutionary Guard and the Russian mob. Levinson disappeared from his hotel shortly thereafter.
The alleged Salahuddin connection adds a further plot twist. He once went by the name David Belfield and, in 1980, by his own account, gunned down a leading Iranian dissident in Bethesda, Md., at the behest of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's regime. He then fled to Iran, where he has been living ever since, though there are rumors that he is disillusioned with the regime and is trying to return to the United States (where he is under a 1981 indictment for the assassination).
The FBI has been investigating Levinson's disappearance, but officials are not saying anything publicly. Florida Sen. Bill Nelson says he believes Levinson is being held in a secret Iranian prison, though he hasn't offered evidence to support his claim. Because Iran and the United States haven't had formal relations since the 1979 hostage taking, the two speak through Swiss intermediaries, though there's been no progress on this case.
http://www.usnews.com
Iran Press News
Iran not to give up uranium enrichment
TEHRAN, Feb. 10 - Iran's Prosecutor General Ayatollah Ghorbanali Dorri-Najafabadi said Tuesday that Iran would never give up the uranium enrichment, the semi-official Fars news agency reported.
"Iran will never give up the uranium enrichment," said Dorri-Najafabadi, who is also the head of Supreme Administrative Court of Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) at a rally in northeastern Iranian province of Semnan to mark the 30th anniversary of the victory of the Islamic Revolution.
"Iran is a regional and global power," Fars quoted him as saying.
Iran's president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, as well, in his address to thousands of people in Tehran's Azadi (liberty) Square Tuesday said that, "The United States must give up threats and sanctions,” and Iran has now turned into "a real and true superpower."
U.S. President Barak Obama said on Monday that his administration is "looking for openings" to start face-to-face talks with Iran.
Washington has been trying to beef up the UN-passed as well as its own sanctions against Tehran for being involved in anti-U.S. coalition forces activities, and for allegedly developing nuclear weapons secretly.
Iran has denied the charges and insisted that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only.
"Iran will never give up the uranium enrichment," said Dorri-Najafabadi, who is also the head of Supreme Administrative Court of Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) at a rally in northeastern Iranian province of Semnan to mark the 30th anniversary of the victory of the Islamic Revolution.
"Iran is a regional and global power," Fars quoted him as saying.
Iran's president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, as well, in his address to thousands of people in Tehran's Azadi (liberty) Square Tuesday said that, "The United States must give up threats and sanctions,” and Iran has now turned into "a real and true superpower."
U.S. President Barak Obama said on Monday that his administration is "looking for openings" to start face-to-face talks with Iran.
Washington has been trying to beef up the UN-passed as well as its own sanctions against Tehran for being involved in anti-U.S. coalition forces activities, and for allegedly developing nuclear weapons secretly.
Iran has denied the charges and insisted that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only.
Xinhua
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Iran and US move closer in delicate diplomatic dance
Ahmadinejad's rhetoric is softening and there are signs of fresh thinking from Washington, but difficulties remain
A diplomatic minuet between the US and Iran is taking place that might just lead to better ties between two countries that have had no formal relations for 30 years. In the latest development, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad – who usually spouts bloodcurdling rhetoric – sounded positively emollient towards the US.
In a speech to mark the 30th anniversary of the Iranian revolution, the president said the world was entering a "new era of dialogue" and that his country would welcome talks based on mutual respect with the US. That was a marked change in tone compared with a speech Ahmadinejad made just a few weeks ago, in which he took a more uncompromising line. Then, in a live televised address, Ahmadinejad said he would welcome a change in American policy provided it came with a withdrawal of US troops from Iraq and an apology for "crimes" America had committed against Iran, including US backing for the 1953 coup that overthrew the democratically elected Muhammad Mossadeq and restored the shah. Or, as Julian Borger, the Guardian's diplomatic editor, put it: "Yes, we can talk, he is saying, if you come on your hands and knees."
The overtures from the US began as soon as Barack Obama was elected in November, when the new administration said on the White House website that it was prepared to deal directly with Iran. This was a major break from the Bush administration, which considered Iran part of an "axis of evil" along with Iraq – before the 2003 US-led invasion – and North Korea. Obama has kept up his overtures: last night, the US president said he expected that his administration would be looking for "openings" where Washington and Tehran could sit down face to face. The Guardian has reported on a letter the US has been working on to send to the Iranians.
But, as Martin Woollacott, who covered the Iranian revolution for the Guardian 30 years ago, warns, a rapprochement is not going to be simple:
Both sides want concessions without budging from their main positions. And, if they are to make any real progress, they first need to reconcile their conflicting understanding of the past, and, second, arrive at some agreement about what the Middle East should look like in the future.
Encouragingly, fresh thinking seems to be coming out of Washington at a time when Obama appears keen to lance the boil in US-Iranian relations. Writing in Foreign Affairs, two Washington heavyweights, Richard Haas and Martin Indyk, argue that the US should abandon its demand that Iran suspend its uranium enrichment programme as a precondition for formal negotiations. That demand by the Bush administration effectively blocked any chance for full diplomatic engagement. Haas and Indyk go further in making the case that the US should be willing to discuss Iran's right to enrich uranium, "provided that Iran agrees to limit its enrichment programme under enhanced safeguards to keep it from developing a 'breakout capability' – the capacity to produce significant amounts of weapons-grade uranium. However, this right must be earned by Iran, not conceded by the United States."
As the US and Iran play diplomatic footsie with each other, Philippe Welti, a Swiss diplomat who spent more than four years as his country's chief envoy to Iran, has this advice for the US: put American diplomats in Tehran. "They don't lose anything, and they get a firsthand insight into the regime," he told the Los Angeles Times. But Welti, who tells of his frustrations in dealing with Iran – including venal politicians – predicts it will be hard going in building up a relationship.
They were attacked in 1980. They were traumatised and still feel traumatised. They are still living that war. They have been exposed to a million threats for years now. They're simply getting ready. It is very difficult for everybody to know what the ultimate purpose of the nuclear programme is. Some observers think they are just buying time. I am not in a position to judge.
Guardian
Not So Fast
What to Make of Ahmadinejad's Olive Branch
By JOE KLEIN
The Soviets famously sent two messages to John F. Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis--one bellicose, the other offering a path toward peace. Kennedy ignored the bellicose one and prevented a nuclear war. Now we're getting mixed messages from the Iranians. On Friday, Majlis Speaker Ali Larijani gave a bellicose anti-American speech at the Munich Security Conference. Today, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad extends an olive branch. Which message is real?
Hint: not Ahmadinejad's, although his shouldn't be ignored. Larijani is a trusted advisor to the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Ahmadinejad is running for re-election as President with very low popularity, given his failed domestic policies and his poisonous blather overseas. My guess is this is an image-softening election ploy. In any case, a ranking European diplomat told me last week, "We want to be dealing with the Supreme Leader's emissaries."
As I've written here before, the approach to Iran is best made carefully, circuitously. We need to make a deal with Russians first--the obvious one is suspending any plans for an anti-missile system in return for verifiable Russian support for the UN's efforts to prevent Iran from developing a bomb. We should also re-establish relations with Iran's ally, Syria...and we should offer to resume cooperation with Iran in Afghanistan. All these initiatives should be well under way before Iran's June elections. Only then, after Ahmadinejad's fate is decided, should we launch direct, high-level talks between a U.S. envoy and a significant player, like Larijani, with a direct line to the Supreme Leader.
In the meantime, we appreciate the olive branch, Mr. Ahmadinejad. We have great respect for your nation and civilization--especially your ancestor, Cyrus the Great, who allowed the Jews to return to Israel and thereby became the ancient world's most famous non-Jewish Zionist.
Joe Klein is TIME's political columnist and author of six books, most recently Politics Lost. His weekly TIME column, "In the Arena," covers national and international affairs.
Time
By JOE KLEIN
The Soviets famously sent two messages to John F. Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis--one bellicose, the other offering a path toward peace. Kennedy ignored the bellicose one and prevented a nuclear war. Now we're getting mixed messages from the Iranians. On Friday, Majlis Speaker Ali Larijani gave a bellicose anti-American speech at the Munich Security Conference. Today, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad extends an olive branch. Which message is real?
Hint: not Ahmadinejad's, although his shouldn't be ignored. Larijani is a trusted advisor to the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Ahmadinejad is running for re-election as President with very low popularity, given his failed domestic policies and his poisonous blather overseas. My guess is this is an image-softening election ploy. In any case, a ranking European diplomat told me last week, "We want to be dealing with the Supreme Leader's emissaries."
As I've written here before, the approach to Iran is best made carefully, circuitously. We need to make a deal with Russians first--the obvious one is suspending any plans for an anti-missile system in return for verifiable Russian support for the UN's efforts to prevent Iran from developing a bomb. We should also re-establish relations with Iran's ally, Syria...and we should offer to resume cooperation with Iran in Afghanistan. All these initiatives should be well under way before Iran's June elections. Only then, after Ahmadinejad's fate is decided, should we launch direct, high-level talks between a U.S. envoy and a significant player, like Larijani, with a direct line to the Supreme Leader.
In the meantime, we appreciate the olive branch, Mr. Ahmadinejad. We have great respect for your nation and civilization--especially your ancestor, Cyrus the Great, who allowed the Jews to return to Israel and thereby became the ancient world's most famous non-Jewish Zionist.
Joe Klein is TIME's political columnist and author of six books, most recently Politics Lost. His weekly TIME column, "In the Arena," covers national and international affairs.
Time
Iran says ready for fair talks, wants real U.S. change
TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran's president said on Tuesday Tehran was ready for talks with the United States but demanded a fundamental change in U.S. policy, in his most measured remarks to America since President Barack Obama took office.
Obama said on Monday that he saw the possibility of diplomatic openings with Iran in the months ahead, marking a break with his predecessor George W. Bush.
The United States and its Western allies accuse Iran of seeking nuclear weapons, a charge Tehran denies. Despite a new approach, Obama's administration has also warned Iran of tougher sanctions if it does not halt its disputed nuclear work.
"The new U.S. administration has announced that they want to produce change and pursue the course of dialogue," President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told a rally to mark the 30th anniversary of the Islamic revolution that ousted the U.S.-backed shah.
"It is quite clear that real change must be fundamental and not tactical. It is clear the Iranian nation welcomes real changes," he said, adding: "The Iranian nation is ready to hold talks but talks in a fair atmosphere with mutual respect."
Ahmadinejad did not refer to the tough conditions he mentioned on previous occasions, a more measured approach that analysts said was likely to be welcomed by Obama and his team.
"On the face of it, it seems to be a significant signal, an opening that will encourage the Obama administration that they (Iranians) are actually willing to sit down," said Paul Salem, director of the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut.
An Iranian political analyst said: "Obama's tone was soft, his tone couldn't be harsh."
Ultimately, policy will not be decided by the president but by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has the final say in all matters of state in the Islamic Republic. He tends to look for a consensus in the political elite, analysts say.
Khamenei has, so far, kept silent on Obama and his overture.
Obama said in January America was prepared to extend a hand of peace if Iran "unclenched its fist." Ahmadinejad responded by demanding Washington withdraw troops from Iraq and Afghanistan, and apologize for what he said were U.S. "crimes" against Iran.
Ahmadinejad has a presidential election to contest in June, which will pit him against former President Mohammad Khatami, who pushed for detente with the West during his 1997-2005 term.
'WINNING CARD'
Ties with Washington have already become a hot topic of political debate as the election race takes shape. Some listening to Ahmadinejad, detected a hint of campaigning.
"Ahmadinejad can play a helpful role in the improvement of Iran-America ties. He can also use this issue as a winning card in the upcoming presidential election," said 24-year-old student Mostafa Jabbari.
Obama said on Monday that he saw the possibility of diplomatic openings with Iran in the months ahead, marking a break with his predecessor George W. Bush.
The United States and its Western allies accuse Iran of seeking nuclear weapons, a charge Tehran denies. Despite a new approach, Obama's administration has also warned Iran of tougher sanctions if it does not halt its disputed nuclear work.
"The new U.S. administration has announced that they want to produce change and pursue the course of dialogue," President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told a rally to mark the 30th anniversary of the Islamic revolution that ousted the U.S.-backed shah.
"It is quite clear that real change must be fundamental and not tactical. It is clear the Iranian nation welcomes real changes," he said, adding: "The Iranian nation is ready to hold talks but talks in a fair atmosphere with mutual respect."
Ahmadinejad did not refer to the tough conditions he mentioned on previous occasions, a more measured approach that analysts said was likely to be welcomed by Obama and his team.
"On the face of it, it seems to be a significant signal, an opening that will encourage the Obama administration that they (Iranians) are actually willing to sit down," said Paul Salem, director of the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut.
An Iranian political analyst said: "Obama's tone was soft, his tone couldn't be harsh."
Ultimately, policy will not be decided by the president but by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has the final say in all matters of state in the Islamic Republic. He tends to look for a consensus in the political elite, analysts say.
Khamenei has, so far, kept silent on Obama and his overture.
Obama said in January America was prepared to extend a hand of peace if Iran "unclenched its fist." Ahmadinejad responded by demanding Washington withdraw troops from Iraq and Afghanistan, and apologize for what he said were U.S. "crimes" against Iran.
Ahmadinejad has a presidential election to contest in June, which will pit him against former President Mohammad Khatami, who pushed for detente with the West during his 1997-2005 term.
'WINNING CARD'
Ties with Washington have already become a hot topic of political debate as the election race takes shape. Some listening to Ahmadinejad, detected a hint of campaigning.
"Ahmadinejad can play a helpful role in the improvement of Iran-America ties. He can also use this issue as a winning card in the upcoming presidential election," said 24-year-old student Mostafa Jabbari.
Many Iranians are tired of isolation but some say Iran needs a hard-liner to win U.S. concessions not a moderate like Khatami, whose reforming efforts were mostly blocked by conservatives.
Speaking to reporters after meeting Iranian Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani in Madrid on Sunday, Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Angel Moratinos said: "They (Iranians) think the American attitude is positive, and they are just waiting for that attitude to manifest itself in some gesture."
But the election race could encourage the United States and Iran to tread cautiously as they await the result, analysts say.
In his speech broadcast on state television, Ahmadinejad also turned to some of his more typical language to criticize the West, saying nations who sought to monopolize power, impose sanctions and threaten military action had not succeeded.
The U.N. Security Council has slapped three rounds of sanctions on Iran and U.S. sanctions have been tightened because Tehran has refused to rein in its nuclear work.
Intelligence Minister Gholamhossein Mohseni-Ejei said a bomb was defused on Tuesday in the western city of Hamedan, "planted by the enemies of the revolution" and targeting those celebrating the 30th anniversary, ISNA news agency reported.
He did point a finger but Iran has often blamed Washington in the past for backing plots to destabilize Iran.
Obama's administration, like Bush's, has refused to rule out military action if needed but says it wants tough diplomacy.
"We will be looking for openings that can be created where we can start sitting across the table face-to-face," Obama said, adding Iran must stop pursuing nuclear weapons, end support for terrorist groups and cease "bellicose language" toward Israel.
Washington broke ties with Iran shortly after the 1979 Islamic revolution when radical students stormed the U.S. embassy and held 52 Americans hostage for 444 days.
(Additional reporting by Hashem Kalantari and Hossein Jaseb in Tehran, Alistair Lyon in Beirut and Jason Webb in Madrid; Editing by Ralph Boulton)
Reuters
Speaking to reporters after meeting Iranian Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani in Madrid on Sunday, Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Angel Moratinos said: "They (Iranians) think the American attitude is positive, and they are just waiting for that attitude to manifest itself in some gesture."
But the election race could encourage the United States and Iran to tread cautiously as they await the result, analysts say.
In his speech broadcast on state television, Ahmadinejad also turned to some of his more typical language to criticize the West, saying nations who sought to monopolize power, impose sanctions and threaten military action had not succeeded.
The U.N. Security Council has slapped three rounds of sanctions on Iran and U.S. sanctions have been tightened because Tehran has refused to rein in its nuclear work.
Intelligence Minister Gholamhossein Mohseni-Ejei said a bomb was defused on Tuesday in the western city of Hamedan, "planted by the enemies of the revolution" and targeting those celebrating the 30th anniversary, ISNA news agency reported.
He did point a finger but Iran has often blamed Washington in the past for backing plots to destabilize Iran.
Obama's administration, like Bush's, has refused to rule out military action if needed but says it wants tough diplomacy.
"We will be looking for openings that can be created where we can start sitting across the table face-to-face," Obama said, adding Iran must stop pursuing nuclear weapons, end support for terrorist groups and cease "bellicose language" toward Israel.
Washington broke ties with Iran shortly after the 1979 Islamic revolution when radical students stormed the U.S. embassy and held 52 Americans hostage for 444 days.
(Additional reporting by Hashem Kalantari and Hossein Jaseb in Tehran, Alistair Lyon in Beirut and Jason Webb in Madrid; Editing by Ralph Boulton)
After 30 years, talk shifts from revolution to democracy
"Thirty years ago, the dominant discourse was the concept of revolution," said Hamid-Reza Jalaipour, a Tehran social scientist. "But now the dominant discourse is democracy."February 10, 2009- Reporting from Absard, Iran -- Four friends gather in a basement eatery in a rural town to talk politics about the revolution three decades ago that changed their lives. "What kind of Islamic revolution allows sexy movies on television?" says Mohammed Rezaie, a 49-year-old farmer and the conservative of the bunch. "What kind of revolution allows young men to gel their hair up like this?" he says, making rabbit ears with his fingers. "What does hair gel have to do with revolution?" bellows Seyed Rahman Hussein, 41. "Who are you to tell someone else how their kid should behave?"Such are the conversations in the hinterlands as Iran celebrates the 30th anniversary of its Islamic Revolution today.It is in the rural areas where the country's most dramatic changes may be occurring, propelling religiously conservative communities from a sleepy semi-feudal past into the 21st century. The rapid transformation has changed the way people think and frame debates about their communities and their relationship to authority."Thirty years ago, the dominant discourse was the concept of revolution," said Hamid-Reza Jalaipour, a Tehran social scientist. "But now the dominant discourse is democracy."On Monday at 9 p.m., supporters of the revolution that overthrew the pro-American monarch, Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, and installed Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini as the country's leader climbed to their rooftops and chanted, "God is great!" to mark the anniversary. Today, hundreds of thousands of people will march through the streets of Tehran to commemorate the day Khomeini declared the Islamic Republic.Much of the political focus in Tehran these days concerns the looming election battle between reformists like former President Mohammad Khatami and hard-line conservatives like the incumbent Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. And in the big city centers, the social focus is on the friction between urban youth and women and the restrictive, fundamentalist clergy.In Iran's rural areas, in places like Absard, there is an inchoate sense of lost simplicity and of perplexity.Among the four friends, none with more than a high school diploma, the tricky questions percolate quickly, spawning charged debates: Why are there no factories here to employ the young? Why are Afghan migrants taking all the jobs? Why is the countryside flooded with hard drugs -- heroin and crystal meth? How did a few get so rich while others stayed poor? How should they respond to the semi-pornographic images from the satellite TV dishes that now rest atop every other home in this town of 30,000?They are pudgy, unpretentious men in shabby clothes, sprinkling their talk with praises to God and the Shiite Muslim saints. They long for the shared sense of purpose of their fading agrarian past, but relish the creature comforts of the modern world. In 30 years, Absard, or "cold water," named for the spring that draws tourists during the summer, has mushroomed from a sleepy backwater of dirt roads and a few hundred potato farmers in mud-brick homes without electricity, gas or phone lines into a thriving mountainside town with a hospital, an agricultural college and three mosques. Well-to-do Iranians from the capital, 50 miles to the west, have even begun buying vacation homes to take advantage of the cool summer air. Under the shah, fewer than 5% of women in the countryside could read, compared with 70% now. Two-thirds of women use modern birth control today, according to a congressional staff briefing on the Iranian economy last year by Djavad Salehi-Isfahani, a scholar at the Brookings Institution. Some refuse to credit the Islamic Republic for such progress. It would have happened anyway, said Ahmad Zeidabadi, a frequent critic of the government. "Three decades have passed since the revolution," he said. "Malaysia, the United Arab Emirates and even Thailand have undergone fundamental changes throughout these years, and the shah's regime would have gone the same way."Indeed, each benefit of modernity has come with a price tag: The college, for example, is on a huge chunk of land previously used for grazing livestock. "Everything that came, we paid for it," says Reza Gol-Mohammad, a former farmer who runs Alborz, the small basement restaurant where the friends are meeting. "Even the loans we get from the government, we pay them back." He grits his teeth and frowns as he grills chicken and prepares rice for the handful of guests at the table. He notes with frustration that rents, utilities and wholesale prices have all shot up.Rezaie, the farmer, says he served proudly on the front lines of the 1980s Iran-Iraq war and considers himself a staunch supporter of the government. He criticizes the others for complaining, resurrecting memories of the hundreds of thousands who sacrificed their lives fighting for the Islamic Republic during the war against Saddam Hussein's forces. "We are not worthy of their blood," he says.Hassan Rastegar, 55, a grizzled former trucker now working at the restaurant, disagrees."We were well fed before the revolution," he says. "The revolution didn't do anything for us. It didn't give us land."It's true no one gives us anything," Rezaie says. "But no one was supposed to give us anything. We helped ourselves up.""You see the fancy houses?" Gol-Mohammad says. "They belong to the capitalists. If you're a capitalist you can buy a piece of land and build the nicest house ever. It's the young who are suffering."Younger farmer Hussein interjects. His friends are mixing everything up. "The debate about freedom is one thing," he says. "The debate about loans to buy houses is another thing.""It's the same. It's all about justice," Gol-Mohammad says."The revolution gave us bravery," Hussein says. "Under the shah, people would see a soldier and they would pee in their pants. Now the people will put their heads into the lion's mouth. Imam Khomeini gave the people the bravery to stand up to authority."Gol-Mohammad, who says he's been locked up 10 times for speaking out against the government, says the mayor's security forces once tore up a man's house, beating him and arresting him over a property dispute. Later, the man was charged with insulting current Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and also Khomeini.Such abuses of power, he says, "are what people are upset about." Thirty years after the revolution, the rich and powerful still lord over the weak, he says.The friends fall silent, until Rezaie speaks up. "We tolerated hardship and sanctions, but our education and economy have gone up," he says. "This revolution changed all of Iran.""I disagree with you," Gol-Mohammad retorts. "I totally disagree with you.""Yes, but I still respect you. I still look up to you," Rezaie says"There are even people who long for the return of the shah, and that's fine," he says, displaying tolerance for sharply contrasting views. "Did you see that Iranian rocket with a satellite going into space?" he says, smiling broadly. "That's our pride. Maybe we'll go hungry. But it won't be a problem. We will grow."
Los Angeles Times
Monday, February 9, 2009
ISSACHAROFF: Iran must be stopped
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's calls to wipe Israel off the map are being renewed with different nuances, but are most accurately expressed by the incessant hum of several thousand centrifuges enriching uranium in Natanz. Each day those centrifuges spin bring Iran closer to a military nuclear capability.
The gravity and scope of the Iranian threat will not be confined to Israel, however. A military nuclear capability underwriting Iran's support of terror in the region will threaten moderate Arab countries and enable Iran to project its power in a more dangerous way as well as expand its footprint in the region.
Emblematic of this growing footprint has been Iran's substantial assistance to Hamas in recent years. Hamas, backed by Iran, has been able to maintain its control of Gaza and amass and extend the range of rockets that have been used against southern Israel. Similarly in Lebanon, Iran replenished Hezbollah's stockpiles of short- and longer -range rockets since the 2006 war, tripling their number to 40,000 and threatening northern Israel.
Tehran's major strategic partner in the region is Syria, which impacts the fragile political situation in Lebanon, undermines Israeli-Palestinian peace efforts, and has assisted the insurgency in Iraq. Iran's role in Iraq and Afghanistan serves the projection of Iranian power and influence in areas of vital strategic importance. Iran is placing itself in a position where it could severely impact the flow of global energy supplies and pursue a destabilizing, hegemonic role in the region.
All international action should flow from the principle that Iran cannot be allowed to develop and acquire a nuclear-weapons capability. There have been serious diplomatic efforts to engage and bring Iran to the table, but in the final analysis, Iran has been the one to reject or evade these offers. Merely enhancing incentives will not entice Iran to give up its nuclear program, but will validate Iran's hardline policy against any concession in the nuclear arena.
As Iran proceeds to a critical phase of its nuclear program, it will attempt to manipulate the international community with the central goal of gaining more time. Pressure must be intensified as a preamble to any renewed engagement with Iran. The absence of such pressure thus far is the reason Iran has chosen defiance over compliance. Rewarding intransigence will only guarantee its recurrence.
The political resolve to prevent a nuclear Iran must be greater than Iran's determination to continue its efforts to develop nuclear weapons. The international community should insist on Iran's compliance with all relevant Security Council and IAEA resolutions and adopt additional tough sanctions such as forbidding arms transfers to Iran, further designating for sanctions Iranian banks that have been involved in financing terrorism and taking tougher measures in the trade and finance sectors.
Major energy deals with Iran should be banned and sanctions extended to Iran's refined gasoline imports. Although rich in oil reserves, Iran has become heavily dependent on refined gasoline from abroad, making it vulnerable to international pressure, particularly during this global economic crisis and period of low oil prices.
The political will to use all the tools of diplomacy to pressure Iran can change its behavior provided it is credible, focused and sustained. Sanctions have worked in the past in relation to Libya and can work in relation to Iran if they are backed by a determined resolve.
The end of all enrichment and reprocessing activities in Iran must remain a fundamental basis for any dialogue. Iran cannot be allowed to maintain a limited enrichment capability on its soil. Such an arrangement would not stop Iran from developing a nuclear-weapons capability, but will in fact facilitate its covert procurement.
Any overall strategy regarding Iran should be a combination of red-line diplomacy accompanied by an international determination to use other means should diplomacy fail. All options must remain on the table. The consequence of inaction and having to deal with a nuclear-armed Iran will be infinitely worse and far more costly.
Tough and unyielding diplomacy combining deadlines and red lines can still prevent a nuclear Iran, but the countdown continues and critical time is being lost.
Jeremy Issacharoff is deputy chief of mission for the Embassy of Israel in Washington.
The gravity and scope of the Iranian threat will not be confined to Israel, however. A military nuclear capability underwriting Iran's support of terror in the region will threaten moderate Arab countries and enable Iran to project its power in a more dangerous way as well as expand its footprint in the region.
Emblematic of this growing footprint has been Iran's substantial assistance to Hamas in recent years. Hamas, backed by Iran, has been able to maintain its control of Gaza and amass and extend the range of rockets that have been used against southern Israel. Similarly in Lebanon, Iran replenished Hezbollah's stockpiles of short- and longer -range rockets since the 2006 war, tripling their number to 40,000 and threatening northern Israel.
Tehran's major strategic partner in the region is Syria, which impacts the fragile political situation in Lebanon, undermines Israeli-Palestinian peace efforts, and has assisted the insurgency in Iraq. Iran's role in Iraq and Afghanistan serves the projection of Iranian power and influence in areas of vital strategic importance. Iran is placing itself in a position where it could severely impact the flow of global energy supplies and pursue a destabilizing, hegemonic role in the region.
All international action should flow from the principle that Iran cannot be allowed to develop and acquire a nuclear-weapons capability. There have been serious diplomatic efforts to engage and bring Iran to the table, but in the final analysis, Iran has been the one to reject or evade these offers. Merely enhancing incentives will not entice Iran to give up its nuclear program, but will validate Iran's hardline policy against any concession in the nuclear arena.
As Iran proceeds to a critical phase of its nuclear program, it will attempt to manipulate the international community with the central goal of gaining more time. Pressure must be intensified as a preamble to any renewed engagement with Iran. The absence of such pressure thus far is the reason Iran has chosen defiance over compliance. Rewarding intransigence will only guarantee its recurrence.
The political resolve to prevent a nuclear Iran must be greater than Iran's determination to continue its efforts to develop nuclear weapons. The international community should insist on Iran's compliance with all relevant Security Council and IAEA resolutions and adopt additional tough sanctions such as forbidding arms transfers to Iran, further designating for sanctions Iranian banks that have been involved in financing terrorism and taking tougher measures in the trade and finance sectors.
Major energy deals with Iran should be banned and sanctions extended to Iran's refined gasoline imports. Although rich in oil reserves, Iran has become heavily dependent on refined gasoline from abroad, making it vulnerable to international pressure, particularly during this global economic crisis and period of low oil prices.
The political will to use all the tools of diplomacy to pressure Iran can change its behavior provided it is credible, focused and sustained. Sanctions have worked in the past in relation to Libya and can work in relation to Iran if they are backed by a determined resolve.
The end of all enrichment and reprocessing activities in Iran must remain a fundamental basis for any dialogue. Iran cannot be allowed to maintain a limited enrichment capability on its soil. Such an arrangement would not stop Iran from developing a nuclear-weapons capability, but will in fact facilitate its covert procurement.
Any overall strategy regarding Iran should be a combination of red-line diplomacy accompanied by an international determination to use other means should diplomacy fail. All options must remain on the table. The consequence of inaction and having to deal with a nuclear-armed Iran will be infinitely worse and far more costly.
Tough and unyielding diplomacy combining deadlines and red lines can still prevent a nuclear Iran, but the countdown continues and critical time is being lost.
Jeremy Issacharoff is deputy chief of mission for the Embassy of Israel in Washington.
Washington Times
Iran constructing four more satellites: report
TEHRAN, Feb. 8 (Xinhua) -- Iran's Minister of Communications and Information Technology Mohammad Soleymani has said that Iran was constructing four more satellites, the local Mehr news agency reported on Sunday.
"Right now four more satellites are being constructed by the efficient Iranian experts," Soleymani was quoted as saying.
"The details of the satellites will be disclosed step by step at their final stage of preparation," he told the Mehr, adding that "With the capabilities attained, we are trying to raise the weight and the altitude of the satellites to be launched."
Talking about the status of Iran's Omid satellite in the orbit, he said that "This satellite is doing its mission and it has no specific problem. The satellite is sending signals to the stations on the earth."
Last Tuesday, Tehran announced that the Omid lightweight telecommunications satellite, its first home-made satellite, had been successfully sent into space by the Iranian-produced satellite carrier Safir 2, evoking the West's concern over its potential military purposes.
Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak urged Wednesday that the international community should tighten sanctions on Iran in light of its launch of the first home-made satellite.
The United States and Israel have consistently refused to rule out the possibility of military strikes against Iran over its refusal to halt its nuclear program, accusing Tehran of trying to develop nuclear weapons under the cover of a civilian nuclear program.
Iran has denied the charges and insisted that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only.
"Right now four more satellites are being constructed by the efficient Iranian experts," Soleymani was quoted as saying.
"The details of the satellites will be disclosed step by step at their final stage of preparation," he told the Mehr, adding that "With the capabilities attained, we are trying to raise the weight and the altitude of the satellites to be launched."
Talking about the status of Iran's Omid satellite in the orbit, he said that "This satellite is doing its mission and it has no specific problem. The satellite is sending signals to the stations on the earth."
Last Tuesday, Tehran announced that the Omid lightweight telecommunications satellite, its first home-made satellite, had been successfully sent into space by the Iranian-produced satellite carrier Safir 2, evoking the West's concern over its potential military purposes.
Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak urged Wednesday that the international community should tighten sanctions on Iran in light of its launch of the first home-made satellite.
The United States and Israel have consistently refused to rule out the possibility of military strikes against Iran over its refusal to halt its nuclear program, accusing Tehran of trying to develop nuclear weapons under the cover of a civilian nuclear program.
Iran has denied the charges and insisted that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only.
Xinhua
Iran inflation slips to 24%
TEHRAN – Iranian inflation -- one of the biggest economic problems facing the country -- dropped to 24 percent in January, a central bank report said on Sunday.
Inflation in urban areas dipped to 24 percent in the Iranian calendar month of Day ending January 19 from 26.4 percent in the previous month of Azar, the bank said on its website.
The latest figure indicates a significant fall since September when inflation peaked at 29.5 percent.
Central bank chief Mahmoud Bahmani has vowed to cut inflation to around 22 percent by March 20, the end of the current Iranian year, through a strategy of "increasing production and supplying goods proportionate to demand."
Central bank officials have cited growth in money supply as the prime factor for the surge in the inflation, along with rising global prices.
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who is facing re-election in four months, has been under fire over his expansionary economic policies for fuelling inflation.
Analysts predict that the government's injection of oil money into the economy would keep the inflation considerably high for months and years to come despite the central bank's efforts to shrink the excessive liquidity.
AFP
Inflation in urban areas dipped to 24 percent in the Iranian calendar month of Day ending January 19 from 26.4 percent in the previous month of Azar, the bank said on its website.
The latest figure indicates a significant fall since September when inflation peaked at 29.5 percent.
Central bank chief Mahmoud Bahmani has vowed to cut inflation to around 22 percent by March 20, the end of the current Iranian year, through a strategy of "increasing production and supplying goods proportionate to demand."
Central bank officials have cited growth in money supply as the prime factor for the surge in the inflation, along with rising global prices.
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who is facing re-election in four months, has been under fire over his expansionary economic policies for fuelling inflation.
Analysts predict that the government's injection of oil money into the economy would keep the inflation considerably high for months and years to come despite the central bank's efforts to shrink the excessive liquidity.
AFP
Iran's unlikely embrace of Bolivia builds influence in U.S. backyard
ACHACACHI, Bolivia — The government of Iran is following the lead of new ally Venezuela by taking its anti-American message to Bolivia , an impoverished but strategically positioned country in the heart of South America .
A nemesis to U.S. interests in the Middle East for 30 years, Iran is now pouring millions of dollars of aid into Bolivia — including construction of a milk factory in Achacachi. Its real motive, however, is joining Bolivia and Venezuela to counter U.S. interests in Latin America , analysts said.
"Is Iran in Bolivia a nuisance to the United States ? Of course it is," said Abbas Milani, the co-director of the Iran Democracy Project at Stanford University's Hoover Institution . " Iran will try to shore up support for Bolivia's president and help the anti-American message of its regime. And being in Bolivia will give Iran more pawns to play in its dealings with the Europeans and the United States ."
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez , a constant U.S. critic, brought Iran and Bolivia together, even though the two countries have little in common but natural gas, large stretches of desert and official antipathy toward the U.S. His government flew Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to visit Bolivian President Evo Morales in September 2007 . Morales traveled to Iran a year later.
Chavez has organized Ecuador , Nicaragua , Bolivia and Cuba into a trade and political alliance that regularly lambastes capitalism and U.S. influence in Latin America .
Iran also has begun to assist Ecuador and Nicaragua , and its Latin American activities have prompted worry from the Obama administration.
"I'm concerned about the level of, frankly, subversive activity that the Iranians are carrying on in a number of places in Latin America , particularly South America and Central America ," Defense Secretary Robert Gates told a Senate committee on Jan. 27 . "They're opening a lot of offices and a lot of fronts, behind which they interfere in what is going on in some of these countries."
Obama administration officials — following the lead of the Bush administration — want to isolate Iran because the Islamic Republic sponsors terrorist groups and because of concerns that it's trying to build a nuclear weapon.
Jorge Quiroga , who was Bolivia's president from 2001 to 2002 and lost the 2005 presidential race to Morales, said Iran is benefiting from its investment in Bolivia .
" Iran needs international recognition," Quiroga said in an interview. "It needs to show that it is not an international pariah."
He added, "We have no cultural, historical or commercial ties whatsoever. Bolivia knows nothing about Iran ."
Morales is a socialist, an Aymara Indian and a coca-growing farmer. Ahmadinejad is a conservative hard-liner and Holocaust doubter who heads an Islamic Republic .
Morales has joked that he's become part of the "axis of evil."
Bolivia even broke relations with Israel to protest the Gaza invasion — even though Israel doesn't have an ambassador in Bolivia — in apparent solidarity with Iran , an implacable foe of Israel .
A secretary at the Iranian Embassy in Bolivia said on three separate days that no embassy official was available for an interview because an Iranian trade delegation was visiting.
Iran and Bolivia have huge natural gas reserves. They have yet to fulfill pledges to have Iran help Bolivia exploit its gas, however.
In the meantime, some 90 Bolivians are building the Iranian-financed milk factory in Achacachi, a town two hours west of La Paz , the capital.
A few miles away, workers maneuvered wheelbarrows full of wet cement while others hammered away at the half-constructed factory.
Johny Zegarra , the crew foreman, said an Iranian representative had visited the construction site four times over the past month.
Achacachi Mayor Eugenio Rojas said Iran had given $1 million to build a factory that will provide milk, yogurt and cheese to 10,000 poor families.
"We don't ask why Iran is interested," Rojas said. "I've never met anyone from Iran . I know very little about that country. We just want the plant."
The facility is one of six planned for Bolivia , said Lena Rospilloso, an official at the country's Ministry of Production and Small Businesses . She said that the Bolivian government would own and operate each one.
Iran has spent $2.5 million on a hospital for poor people in the city of El Alto to be operated by an Iranian nonprofit group, said Ener Chavez , a Bolivian Ministry of Health spokesman.
Iran is also planning to build two cement plants that the Bolivian government would own and operate, Vice President Alvaro Garcia said in an interview.
"We see this as a medium-term project," Garcia said. "What we want is development and progress."
Morales seems determined to deepen ties with Iran even though doing so will strain already-difficult relations with the U.S.
Morales expelled the U.S. ambassador in September for allegedly conspiring with the opposition. The U.S. then expelled Bolivia's ambassador.
The U.S. and Iran haven't had diplomatic relations since 1980.
" The United States should worry about its own problems," Juan Ramon Quintana , the minister of the presidency, said in an interview. "The Bolivian people define who helps us, not the United States ."
The aid from Iran totals only several million dollars so far, a fraction of the money given by Venezuela and the assistance provided by Cuba in the form of teachers and doctors.
Garcia said that Venezuela has given $200 million over the past two years in a program known as "Bolivia Cambia, Evo Cumple," or " Bolivia is changing, Evo is fulfilling his promises."
Morales has given away much of the money by distributing checks from the Venezuelan Embassy to mayors throughout Bolivia to build schools, hospitals, roads.
Venezuela also has sent Bolivia some 300 tractors and 200 ambulances.
Venezuela also has financed 30 radio stations in rural areas that broadcast pro-government propaganda, said Henry Aranciba, an official at the government's National Directorate of Social Communication .
The Venezuelan Embassy in La Paz didn't return phone calls for comment.
Venezuelan money financed the construction of a hospital late last month in Huarina, a town in the Andes some 90 minutes west of La Paz .
Venezuela is even trying to buy La Razon, a La Paz daily newspaper, said Gustavo Torrico , a congressman in the governing party close to Morales, in confirming widespread speculation. La Razon, perhaps the country's most respected newspaper, frequently provokes Morales' ire for its hard-hitting reports. Venezuela also would buy ATB, a leading La Paz television station, Torrico said.
"They want to buy the media to push their ideological aims and help the Bolivian government," Torrico said in an interview.
A nemesis to U.S. interests in the Middle East for 30 years, Iran is now pouring millions of dollars of aid into Bolivia — including construction of a milk factory in Achacachi. Its real motive, however, is joining Bolivia and Venezuela to counter U.S. interests in Latin America , analysts said.
"Is Iran in Bolivia a nuisance to the United States ? Of course it is," said Abbas Milani, the co-director of the Iran Democracy Project at Stanford University's Hoover Institution . " Iran will try to shore up support for Bolivia's president and help the anti-American message of its regime. And being in Bolivia will give Iran more pawns to play in its dealings with the Europeans and the United States ."
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez , a constant U.S. critic, brought Iran and Bolivia together, even though the two countries have little in common but natural gas, large stretches of desert and official antipathy toward the U.S. His government flew Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to visit Bolivian President Evo Morales in September 2007 . Morales traveled to Iran a year later.
Chavez has organized Ecuador , Nicaragua , Bolivia and Cuba into a trade and political alliance that regularly lambastes capitalism and U.S. influence in Latin America .
Iran also has begun to assist Ecuador and Nicaragua , and its Latin American activities have prompted worry from the Obama administration.
"I'm concerned about the level of, frankly, subversive activity that the Iranians are carrying on in a number of places in Latin America , particularly South America and Central America ," Defense Secretary Robert Gates told a Senate committee on Jan. 27 . "They're opening a lot of offices and a lot of fronts, behind which they interfere in what is going on in some of these countries."
Obama administration officials — following the lead of the Bush administration — want to isolate Iran because the Islamic Republic sponsors terrorist groups and because of concerns that it's trying to build a nuclear weapon.
Jorge Quiroga , who was Bolivia's president from 2001 to 2002 and lost the 2005 presidential race to Morales, said Iran is benefiting from its investment in Bolivia .
" Iran needs international recognition," Quiroga said in an interview. "It needs to show that it is not an international pariah."
He added, "We have no cultural, historical or commercial ties whatsoever. Bolivia knows nothing about Iran ."
Morales is a socialist, an Aymara Indian and a coca-growing farmer. Ahmadinejad is a conservative hard-liner and Holocaust doubter who heads an Islamic Republic .
Morales has joked that he's become part of the "axis of evil."
Bolivia even broke relations with Israel to protest the Gaza invasion — even though Israel doesn't have an ambassador in Bolivia — in apparent solidarity with Iran , an implacable foe of Israel .
A secretary at the Iranian Embassy in Bolivia said on three separate days that no embassy official was available for an interview because an Iranian trade delegation was visiting.
Iran and Bolivia have huge natural gas reserves. They have yet to fulfill pledges to have Iran help Bolivia exploit its gas, however.
In the meantime, some 90 Bolivians are building the Iranian-financed milk factory in Achacachi, a town two hours west of La Paz , the capital.
A few miles away, workers maneuvered wheelbarrows full of wet cement while others hammered away at the half-constructed factory.
Johny Zegarra , the crew foreman, said an Iranian representative had visited the construction site four times over the past month.
Achacachi Mayor Eugenio Rojas said Iran had given $1 million to build a factory that will provide milk, yogurt and cheese to 10,000 poor families.
"We don't ask why Iran is interested," Rojas said. "I've never met anyone from Iran . I know very little about that country. We just want the plant."
The facility is one of six planned for Bolivia , said Lena Rospilloso, an official at the country's Ministry of Production and Small Businesses . She said that the Bolivian government would own and operate each one.
Iran has spent $2.5 million on a hospital for poor people in the city of El Alto to be operated by an Iranian nonprofit group, said Ener Chavez , a Bolivian Ministry of Health spokesman.
Iran is also planning to build two cement plants that the Bolivian government would own and operate, Vice President Alvaro Garcia said in an interview.
"We see this as a medium-term project," Garcia said. "What we want is development and progress."
Morales seems determined to deepen ties with Iran even though doing so will strain already-difficult relations with the U.S.
Morales expelled the U.S. ambassador in September for allegedly conspiring with the opposition. The U.S. then expelled Bolivia's ambassador.
The U.S. and Iran haven't had diplomatic relations since 1980.
" The United States should worry about its own problems," Juan Ramon Quintana , the minister of the presidency, said in an interview. "The Bolivian people define who helps us, not the United States ."
The aid from Iran totals only several million dollars so far, a fraction of the money given by Venezuela and the assistance provided by Cuba in the form of teachers and doctors.
Garcia said that Venezuela has given $200 million over the past two years in a program known as "Bolivia Cambia, Evo Cumple," or " Bolivia is changing, Evo is fulfilling his promises."
Morales has given away much of the money by distributing checks from the Venezuelan Embassy to mayors throughout Bolivia to build schools, hospitals, roads.
Venezuela also has sent Bolivia some 300 tractors and 200 ambulances.
Venezuela also has financed 30 radio stations in rural areas that broadcast pro-government propaganda, said Henry Aranciba, an official at the government's National Directorate of Social Communication .
The Venezuelan Embassy in La Paz didn't return phone calls for comment.
Venezuelan money financed the construction of a hospital late last month in Huarina, a town in the Andes some 90 minutes west of La Paz .
Venezuela is even trying to buy La Razon, a La Paz daily newspaper, said Gustavo Torrico , a congressman in the governing party close to Morales, in confirming widespread speculation. La Razon, perhaps the country's most respected newspaper, frequently provokes Morales' ire for its hard-hitting reports. Venezuela also would buy ATB, a leading La Paz television station, Torrico said.
"They want to buy the media to push their ideological aims and help the Bolivian government," Torrico said in an interview.
McClatchy Newspapers
Saturday, February 7, 2009
Iran’s Hope and Mideast Fears
Iran has launched its first home made communications satellite ‘Omid’ as a “data processing satellite project”; first in terms of being domestically produced and launched by a rocket Safir-2, it can carry a satellite — or a nuclear warhead or chemical weapon.
Though Iran had previously launched satellites in orbit, the first in 2005 (Sina-1, the Russian made missile and one that was launched by a Russian rocket) and a solid fuel rocket, Sajjil in November 2008, the launch of ‘Omid’ exhibits an advancement level in missile technology capability that Iran has achieved despite stringent international sanctions. This marks a new chapter in its missile technology capability. A missile essentially carries three components; the body, the engine and the warhead that can be used for either peaceful civilian purposes such as a satellite or for military purposes.
‘Omid’, that translates as hope, is being translated in more ominous terms worldwide. Iran’s so-called peaceful and friendly message to the world is, however, being interpreted differently by the West and Israel. Israel of course sees it as another step closer to a direct existential threat from Iran.
The neighbouring region, principally the Gulf states, is also right to be concerned about the implications arising from this development. This would directly bring to mind the correlation between Iran’s acquired missile capability and its covert attempts at acquiring nuclear capability.
Iran’s long standing disputes in the region and its interventionist policies are bound to acquire greater seriousness once it does acquire nuclear capability. A capability Iran has been defending as its due right and one solely for civilian purposes, despite its continued uranium enrichment in the face of international pressure.
The significance of this launch, albeit marking the 30th anniversary of Islamic Revolution, is more of an implicit message to the new administration in Washington that Iran has reached an advanced stage in missile capability and cannot be stopped. It is clearly understood that a certain level of advanced missile technology is of utmost importance to any nuclear programme, as it is the crucial delivery mechanism of nuclear warheads.
So this development could be used by the Iranian government for leverage in case negotiations are held with the Obama administration that has expressed desire for engaging Iran in talks.
On the other hand, it could encourage Israel to react strongly to the latest development. Israeli defence minister Ehud Barak’s recent statement that the US should first insist on a timeline from Iran for halting uranium enrichment before it enters negotiations is clearly going to set the stage for the kind of reaction we may expect in coming months. Iran must at this point show flexibility and maturity in its dealings with the Obama administration and act responsibly towards its Gulf neighbours that are justifiably concerned over its ambitions.
Though Iran had previously launched satellites in orbit, the first in 2005 (Sina-1, the Russian made missile and one that was launched by a Russian rocket) and a solid fuel rocket, Sajjil in November 2008, the launch of ‘Omid’ exhibits an advancement level in missile technology capability that Iran has achieved despite stringent international sanctions. This marks a new chapter in its missile technology capability. A missile essentially carries three components; the body, the engine and the warhead that can be used for either peaceful civilian purposes such as a satellite or for military purposes.
‘Omid’, that translates as hope, is being translated in more ominous terms worldwide. Iran’s so-called peaceful and friendly message to the world is, however, being interpreted differently by the West and Israel. Israel of course sees it as another step closer to a direct existential threat from Iran.
The neighbouring region, principally the Gulf states, is also right to be concerned about the implications arising from this development. This would directly bring to mind the correlation between Iran’s acquired missile capability and its covert attempts at acquiring nuclear capability.
Iran’s long standing disputes in the region and its interventionist policies are bound to acquire greater seriousness once it does acquire nuclear capability. A capability Iran has been defending as its due right and one solely for civilian purposes, despite its continued uranium enrichment in the face of international pressure.
The significance of this launch, albeit marking the 30th anniversary of Islamic Revolution, is more of an implicit message to the new administration in Washington that Iran has reached an advanced stage in missile capability and cannot be stopped. It is clearly understood that a certain level of advanced missile technology is of utmost importance to any nuclear programme, as it is the crucial delivery mechanism of nuclear warheads.
So this development could be used by the Iranian government for leverage in case negotiations are held with the Obama administration that has expressed desire for engaging Iran in talks.
On the other hand, it could encourage Israel to react strongly to the latest development. Israeli defence minister Ehud Barak’s recent statement that the US should first insist on a timeline from Iran for halting uranium enrichment before it enters negotiations is clearly going to set the stage for the kind of reaction we may expect in coming months. Iran must at this point show flexibility and maturity in its dealings with the Obama administration and act responsibly towards its Gulf neighbours that are justifiably concerned over its ambitions.
Khaleej Times
Iran: Nuclear, space progress despite sanctions
TEHRAN, Iran – Iran has achieved breakthroughs in nuclear and space technology despite international sanctions against it, the country's top leader said Saturday.
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told military commanders that instead of weakening Iran, sanctions by the U.S., the U.N. and others have forced it to become more self-reliant, leading to greater strides by Iranian scientists and to technological advancements unseen in the country's history.
Iranian leaders often boast of technological progress as they seek to assure their people that sanctions and isolation have not hurt the country, even as unemployment and inflation increase.
Most recently, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced on Tuesday the launch of Iran's first domestically produced satellite. He faces a tough re-election battle this year, not least because of the economic woes brought on by falling oil prices and sanctions.
The United States imposed sanctions against Iran soon after its 1979 Islamic revolution, which toppled the U.S.-backed Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi and brought hard-line clerics to power. The sanctions banned the export of any dual-use technology, including nuclear, space and missile equipment. Over the years, Washington has tightened sanctions against any investment in Iran.
Since 2006, Iran has also been under U.N. Security Council sanctions, applied to its nuclear and missile industries, for refusing to halt uranium enrichment, a technology that can be used to produce fuel for nuclear power plants or the material for atomic bombs.
The United States and some of its allies have accused Iran of seeking to build nuclear weapons. Iran has denied the charge, saying its nuclear program is geared towards generating electricity, not weapons production.
Vice President Joe Biden told a security conference in Germany that the U.S. was willing to talk to Iran but would act to isolate and pressure the country if it does not scrap parts of its nuclear program.
The U.S., Biden said, would also "continue to develop missile defenses to counter a growing Iranian capability, provided the technology is proven and it is cost effective."
Iran says it has achieved proficiency in the entire nuclear fuel cycle — from extracting uranium ore to enriching it — and says it has 5,000 centrifuges operating in its Natanz uranium enrichment plant in central Iran.
On Monday night, Iran sent its first domestically made satellite — called the Omid, or hope in Farsi — into orbit using an Iranian-built satellite-carrier rocket. Analysts described it as a key step for an ambitious space program that worries the U.S. and other world powers because the same rocket technology used to launch satellites can also deliver warheads.
"It was from the depth of various kinds of sanctions imposed on Iran for years that the Omid satellite came into existence and was sent into orbit," state television quoted Khamenei as saying.
"And it was out of all restrictions imposed against the Iranian nation that (Iran) achieved uranium enrichment technology, which is in the hands of few powerful countries," Khamenei was quoted by the television as saying.
Among Iran's other scientific boasts, it says it cloned a sheep in 2006. Iran has also built small passenger planes, though it lacks spare parts for its fleet of bigger U.S.- and European-made commercial aircraft. It also exports luxury cars.
Iranian political analyst Saeed Leylaz said Iran's defense industry has also made strides despite international sanctions.
Prior to the revolution, "Iran was a net importer of weapons," Leylaz said. "Sanctions forced Iran to produce its defense requirements domestically. Now, it's even an exporter of weapons."
In July 2003, the Revolutionary Guards were equipped with the Shahab, or Shooting Star, a medium-range missile that can carry a nuclear warhead and reach Israel and various U.S. military bases in the region. Since then, it has tested several missiles with a range of 1,240 miles (2,000 kilometers).
Iran says it has developed solid fuel technology in producing missiles, a major breakthrough that increases accuracy.
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told military commanders that instead of weakening Iran, sanctions by the U.S., the U.N. and others have forced it to become more self-reliant, leading to greater strides by Iranian scientists and to technological advancements unseen in the country's history.
Iranian leaders often boast of technological progress as they seek to assure their people that sanctions and isolation have not hurt the country, even as unemployment and inflation increase.
Most recently, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced on Tuesday the launch of Iran's first domestically produced satellite. He faces a tough re-election battle this year, not least because of the economic woes brought on by falling oil prices and sanctions.
The United States imposed sanctions against Iran soon after its 1979 Islamic revolution, which toppled the U.S.-backed Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi and brought hard-line clerics to power. The sanctions banned the export of any dual-use technology, including nuclear, space and missile equipment. Over the years, Washington has tightened sanctions against any investment in Iran.
Since 2006, Iran has also been under U.N. Security Council sanctions, applied to its nuclear and missile industries, for refusing to halt uranium enrichment, a technology that can be used to produce fuel for nuclear power plants or the material for atomic bombs.
The United States and some of its allies have accused Iran of seeking to build nuclear weapons. Iran has denied the charge, saying its nuclear program is geared towards generating electricity, not weapons production.
Vice President Joe Biden told a security conference in Germany that the U.S. was willing to talk to Iran but would act to isolate and pressure the country if it does not scrap parts of its nuclear program.
The U.S., Biden said, would also "continue to develop missile defenses to counter a growing Iranian capability, provided the technology is proven and it is cost effective."
Iran says it has achieved proficiency in the entire nuclear fuel cycle — from extracting uranium ore to enriching it — and says it has 5,000 centrifuges operating in its Natanz uranium enrichment plant in central Iran.
On Monday night, Iran sent its first domestically made satellite — called the Omid, or hope in Farsi — into orbit using an Iranian-built satellite-carrier rocket. Analysts described it as a key step for an ambitious space program that worries the U.S. and other world powers because the same rocket technology used to launch satellites can also deliver warheads.
"It was from the depth of various kinds of sanctions imposed on Iran for years that the Omid satellite came into existence and was sent into orbit," state television quoted Khamenei as saying.
"And it was out of all restrictions imposed against the Iranian nation that (Iran) achieved uranium enrichment technology, which is in the hands of few powerful countries," Khamenei was quoted by the television as saying.
Among Iran's other scientific boasts, it says it cloned a sheep in 2006. Iran has also built small passenger planes, though it lacks spare parts for its fleet of bigger U.S.- and European-made commercial aircraft. It also exports luxury cars.
Iranian political analyst Saeed Leylaz said Iran's defense industry has also made strides despite international sanctions.
Prior to the revolution, "Iran was a net importer of weapons," Leylaz said. "Sanctions forced Iran to produce its defense requirements domestically. Now, it's even an exporter of weapons."
In July 2003, the Revolutionary Guards were equipped with the Shahab, or Shooting Star, a medium-range missile that can carry a nuclear warhead and reach Israel and various U.S. military bases in the region. Since then, it has tested several missiles with a range of 1,240 miles (2,000 kilometers).
Iran says it has developed solid fuel technology in producing missiles, a major breakthrough that increases accuracy.
Ap Associated Press
Iran: A Familiar Face to Challenge Ahmadinejad
Will Mohammed Khatami run for a third term as president of Iran, or won't he? That's the question dominating the political conversation in Tehran ahead of the June poll, in which hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad - who succeeded the reformist Khatami in 2005 - is standing for reelection. Pressure has been mounting on the former President to run again, with many seeing him as the only candidate able to defeat Ahmadinejad. There has even been an unprecedented public "Invite Khatami" campaign whose nostalgic theme song ends, "This time, we will truly appreciate your presence."
On Wednesday, the reluctant candidate who once personified Iran's reform movement gave those who had been lobbying him to run reason to celebrate. "I should fulfill my promises made to people and announce my readiness to run [in the elections] despite my personal wish," Khatami said somewhat non-bindingly in a meeting with non-governmental groups. (See images of health care in Tehran)
"Just take my word for it," assures Mostafa Tajzadeh, a former deputy Interior Minister in Khatami's cabinet and currently a close aide. "In Khatami-speak, that's as close as it gets to a declaration before he announces his candidacy publicly, probably in the coming week."
Khatami had hoped to persuade his former presidential adviser, Mir-Hossein Moussavi, to run in his stead, but made clear that if Moussavi declined, he would be forced to accept the mantle of responsibility. According to Tajzadeh, the pressure on him, "combined with the terrible situation of the country," has made Khatami feel a social obligation to run against Ahmadinejad. A victory by the reformist leader who promoted domestic liberalization and accommodation with the West on the international front would mark a profound political shift from Ahmadinejad, whose foreign policy has been based on an uncompromising defiance. But victory is far from certain, and that may be one reason Khatami has agreed to run.
"The one thing he doesn't want to happen is for people to blame him later that he didn't offer himself when he was called upon and needed most," explains Tajzadeh. "The worst that can happen is he'll lose. At least he won't be blamed for not running."
Last week, Moussavi appeared to take himself out of the running. Having served in the now defunct post of prime minister during the Iran-Iraq war, Moussavi is well-liked by Iranians from across the political spectrum because he is credited with having managed the Islamic Republic through its most difficult years. But one political analyst requesting anonymity suggested that Moussavi's reluctance to run is due to his uncertainty over the extent of authority he would enjoy in the presidency. During his time as prime minister, he is known to have had disagreements with Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who had been president at the time and is now Supreme Leader.
The powers of the presidency also poses a key dilemma for Khatami. Supporters of his reform movement had been disillusioned during Khatami's two terms of office from 1997 until 2005, as clerical conservatives - backed by Ayatollah Khamenei - blocked most of his efforts to create a more open society.
In a small, closed meeting with fellow reformists about a month ago, the soft-spoken reformer is said to have shown an uncharacteristic fit of frustration, proclaiming that he would only run if he knew he can do the job, according to a person present who asked to remain anonymous.
Asked whether Khatami's decision to run follows fruitful talks with the Supreme Leader, Tajzadeh responds, "Let's just put it this way: If he had reached the conclusion that he wouldn't be invested with enough powers to run the country, he wouldn't declare his candidacy."
It was the electorate's frustration with the performance of the economy that propelled the populist Ahmadinejad to victory in 2005, but that frustration, if anything, has only grown worse in the course of his term of office, as soaring inflation has halved purchasing power in urban areas. And that could help Khatami.
"This time the expectations are much lower," says former vice- President Mohammad-Ali Abtahi, when asked why Khatami would have a chance of defeating the incumbent despite the disappointing note on which the reformist left office in 2005. "Expectations are low enough that people would be happy if he returned things to how they were at the start of Ahmadinejad's presidency... People know this is a critical moment for Iran because the Obama presidency is an opportunity this country needs to take advantage of. Whether we do or not, depends on [who is] president here."
Reformist activists say their unofficial polling show that Khatami would beat Ahmadinejad by a two-to-one margin. "The surveys may show great support for Khatami," says Majid Hosseini, a political analyst in the camp of the Tehran mayor Mohammad-Baqer Qalibaf, "but the reformists are ignoring an important factor: our surveys show that those supporters won't actually show up at the polls to vote. They won't participate, because they have already been through this scenario for two terms and nothing happened."
Although most people questioned in an unscientific survey on the streets of Tehran said they won't vote for Ahmadinejad, many believed that the incumbent would still carry the rural areas. "He's been good to the provinces," says sportswear merchant Ali Paykani, 53. "He's laid water and gas pipelines, and given them agricultural loans. Here in the bazaar, no one wants him to be president again, but these elections are decided by the people in the provinces."
The high negative feelings towards both the incumbent and his predecessor may open the way for a third candidate. "Both Ahmadinejad and Khatami have strong opponents," says Qalibaf aide Hosseini, adding, "In Iran, opposing votes are more important than supporting votes. That's why a third candidate like Qalibaf may have better chances at winning."
Qalibaf has yet to announce whether he intends to run. Another reformist candidate, Mehdi Karroubi, the head of the National Trust party, has already declared his candidacy, but Khatami has vowed that the reformists would unite behind a single candidate. "Both Karroubi and Khatami have enough political intelligence to know that if they both run, neither will get enough votes," says an editor at Karroubi's paper.
The stakes are as high as they've ever been, with a consensus among reformists and pragmatic conservatives that the fate of their country depends on being able to wrest the presidency away from Ahmadinejad. But whether that consensus translates into an effective electoral challenge remains to be seen.
On Wednesday, the reluctant candidate who once personified Iran's reform movement gave those who had been lobbying him to run reason to celebrate. "I should fulfill my promises made to people and announce my readiness to run [in the elections] despite my personal wish," Khatami said somewhat non-bindingly in a meeting with non-governmental groups. (See images of health care in Tehran)
"Just take my word for it," assures Mostafa Tajzadeh, a former deputy Interior Minister in Khatami's cabinet and currently a close aide. "In Khatami-speak, that's as close as it gets to a declaration before he announces his candidacy publicly, probably in the coming week."
Khatami had hoped to persuade his former presidential adviser, Mir-Hossein Moussavi, to run in his stead, but made clear that if Moussavi declined, he would be forced to accept the mantle of responsibility. According to Tajzadeh, the pressure on him, "combined with the terrible situation of the country," has made Khatami feel a social obligation to run against Ahmadinejad. A victory by the reformist leader who promoted domestic liberalization and accommodation with the West on the international front would mark a profound political shift from Ahmadinejad, whose foreign policy has been based on an uncompromising defiance. But victory is far from certain, and that may be one reason Khatami has agreed to run.
"The one thing he doesn't want to happen is for people to blame him later that he didn't offer himself when he was called upon and needed most," explains Tajzadeh. "The worst that can happen is he'll lose. At least he won't be blamed for not running."
Last week, Moussavi appeared to take himself out of the running. Having served in the now defunct post of prime minister during the Iran-Iraq war, Moussavi is well-liked by Iranians from across the political spectrum because he is credited with having managed the Islamic Republic through its most difficult years. But one political analyst requesting anonymity suggested that Moussavi's reluctance to run is due to his uncertainty over the extent of authority he would enjoy in the presidency. During his time as prime minister, he is known to have had disagreements with Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who had been president at the time and is now Supreme Leader.
The powers of the presidency also poses a key dilemma for Khatami. Supporters of his reform movement had been disillusioned during Khatami's two terms of office from 1997 until 2005, as clerical conservatives - backed by Ayatollah Khamenei - blocked most of his efforts to create a more open society.
In a small, closed meeting with fellow reformists about a month ago, the soft-spoken reformer is said to have shown an uncharacteristic fit of frustration, proclaiming that he would only run if he knew he can do the job, according to a person present who asked to remain anonymous.
Asked whether Khatami's decision to run follows fruitful talks with the Supreme Leader, Tajzadeh responds, "Let's just put it this way: If he had reached the conclusion that he wouldn't be invested with enough powers to run the country, he wouldn't declare his candidacy."
It was the electorate's frustration with the performance of the economy that propelled the populist Ahmadinejad to victory in 2005, but that frustration, if anything, has only grown worse in the course of his term of office, as soaring inflation has halved purchasing power in urban areas. And that could help Khatami.
"This time the expectations are much lower," says former vice- President Mohammad-Ali Abtahi, when asked why Khatami would have a chance of defeating the incumbent despite the disappointing note on which the reformist left office in 2005. "Expectations are low enough that people would be happy if he returned things to how they were at the start of Ahmadinejad's presidency... People know this is a critical moment for Iran because the Obama presidency is an opportunity this country needs to take advantage of. Whether we do or not, depends on [who is] president here."
Reformist activists say their unofficial polling show that Khatami would beat Ahmadinejad by a two-to-one margin. "The surveys may show great support for Khatami," says Majid Hosseini, a political analyst in the camp of the Tehran mayor Mohammad-Baqer Qalibaf, "but the reformists are ignoring an important factor: our surveys show that those supporters won't actually show up at the polls to vote. They won't participate, because they have already been through this scenario for two terms and nothing happened."
Although most people questioned in an unscientific survey on the streets of Tehran said they won't vote for Ahmadinejad, many believed that the incumbent would still carry the rural areas. "He's been good to the provinces," says sportswear merchant Ali Paykani, 53. "He's laid water and gas pipelines, and given them agricultural loans. Here in the bazaar, no one wants him to be president again, but these elections are decided by the people in the provinces."
The high negative feelings towards both the incumbent and his predecessor may open the way for a third candidate. "Both Ahmadinejad and Khatami have strong opponents," says Qalibaf aide Hosseini, adding, "In Iran, opposing votes are more important than supporting votes. That's why a third candidate like Qalibaf may have better chances at winning."
Qalibaf has yet to announce whether he intends to run. Another reformist candidate, Mehdi Karroubi, the head of the National Trust party, has already declared his candidacy, but Khatami has vowed that the reformists would unite behind a single candidate. "Both Karroubi and Khatami have enough political intelligence to know that if they both run, neither will get enough votes," says an editor at Karroubi's paper.
The stakes are as high as they've ever been, with a consensus among reformists and pragmatic conservatives that the fate of their country depends on being able to wrest the presidency away from Ahmadinejad. But whether that consensus translates into an effective electoral challenge remains to be seen.
Time
Is Iran prepared to undo 30 years of anti-Americanism?
As Obama spells out aims to engage with Iran, the Islamic Republic debates whether to step away from decades of hatred for the 'Great Satan.'
Tehran, Iran - "On that day when the United States of America will praise us, we should mourn," said Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, leader of Iran's 1979 Islamic Revolution.
His words so captured the uncompromising anti-American ideology here that they were painted like a billboard across the old US Embassy wall in Tehran, standing for years as a message of defiance to the West.
Today the quote is gone, recently painted over as if to signify a softening of Iran's hard-line rhetoric. But as President Obama spells out his wish to engage with Iran, is the Islamic Republic – which marks its 30th anniversary next week – really ready to set aside decades of official hatred for the "Great Satan"?
That is the debate now swirling across Iran, where leaders have been sending mixed signals as they anticipate an unprecedented public effort by Washington to reach out to its archrival.
[This is Part 2 in a two-part package on Iran's view of America under Obama. To read Part 1, 'Iranians wary of Obama's approach,' click here.]
Call for global respect
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Thursday called for a new level of global respect: "Bullying powers should learn how to speak correctly and be polite so Iran's cultured and peace-loving people listen to them," he told a rally in the northeast city of Mashad. "Iranians are logical people … and welcome anyone who offers a solution to problems of the world."
Analysts agree that only Supreme Leader Ayatollah Sayed Ali Khamenei can make a final decision on US ties – and justify it to ideologues that have despised America for a generation.
But not all agree that Ayatollah Khamenei can bring himself to do away with such a useful enemy. Last November he said not a day had passed "in which America has had good intentions toward Iran," and that the US-Iran problem is "like a matter of life and death."
"The Leader is a very rational person [and] wants to control the country and respond to reality," says Amir Mohebian, a conservative editor and analyst. "When the US sends a hard signal, the Supreme Leader is very hard. If the US sends a soft signal, he is very soft. We balance ourselves with our partner."
While Iran boasts the most pro-American population in the region, any substantive talks with the US are a big step for a regime that still chants "Death to America" at rallies.
"Some people think this is the time to solve the problem with the US in a balanced way," says Mr. Mohebian. "But others think the hostility against the US after 30 years is a main element of our identity, and if we solve it we will dissolve ourselves."
Mixed signals from Tehran
The mixed signals from Tehran can bolster either view. The firebrand Mr. Ahmadinejad wrote an unprecedented note of congratulations to Mr. Obama just days after the US election, noting high expectations for change. Despite fierce anti-Western rhetoric and verbal attacks against the US, Ahmadinejad has reached out more than any of his predecessors, telling Americans the US could be a "great friend" of Iran.
His words so captured the uncompromising anti-American ideology here that they were painted like a billboard across the old US Embassy wall in Tehran, standing for years as a message of defiance to the West.
Today the quote is gone, recently painted over as if to signify a softening of Iran's hard-line rhetoric. But as President Obama spells out his wish to engage with Iran, is the Islamic Republic – which marks its 30th anniversary next week – really ready to set aside decades of official hatred for the "Great Satan"?
That is the debate now swirling across Iran, where leaders have been sending mixed signals as they anticipate an unprecedented public effort by Washington to reach out to its archrival.
[This is Part 2 in a two-part package on Iran's view of America under Obama. To read Part 1, 'Iranians wary of Obama's approach,' click here.]
Call for global respect
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Thursday called for a new level of global respect: "Bullying powers should learn how to speak correctly and be polite so Iran's cultured and peace-loving people listen to them," he told a rally in the northeast city of Mashad. "Iranians are logical people … and welcome anyone who offers a solution to problems of the world."
Analysts agree that only Supreme Leader Ayatollah Sayed Ali Khamenei can make a final decision on US ties – and justify it to ideologues that have despised America for a generation.
But not all agree that Ayatollah Khamenei can bring himself to do away with such a useful enemy. Last November he said not a day had passed "in which America has had good intentions toward Iran," and that the US-Iran problem is "like a matter of life and death."
"The Leader is a very rational person [and] wants to control the country and respond to reality," says Amir Mohebian, a conservative editor and analyst. "When the US sends a hard signal, the Supreme Leader is very hard. If the US sends a soft signal, he is very soft. We balance ourselves with our partner."
While Iran boasts the most pro-American population in the region, any substantive talks with the US are a big step for a regime that still chants "Death to America" at rallies.
"Some people think this is the time to solve the problem with the US in a balanced way," says Mr. Mohebian. "But others think the hostility against the US after 30 years is a main element of our identity, and if we solve it we will dissolve ourselves."
Mixed signals from Tehran
The mixed signals from Tehran can bolster either view. The firebrand Mr. Ahmadinejad wrote an unprecedented note of congratulations to Mr. Obama just days after the US election, noting high expectations for change. Despite fierce anti-Western rhetoric and verbal attacks against the US, Ahmadinejad has reached out more than any of his predecessors, telling Americans the US could be a "great friend" of Iran.
But this week an official representative of Khamenei said that confronting the "arrogant policies" of the US and Israel were "red lines" for Iran.
"Opposing the Zionist regime and defending oppressed people are among the pillars of the Islamic revolution and Iran and America's relationship will not change because of Obama taking office," said cleric Ali Maboudi, in a Fars News Agency report quoted by Reuters.
American officials are deciding how to approach Iran – and when, considering Ahmadinejad is up for reelection in June – to maximize chances of success on issues from Iran's nuclear ambitions to its regional role. The US has long labeled Iran the "premier state sponsor of terror" for supporting Hezbollah and Hamas and accused it of causing US deaths in Iraq by supporting Shiite militias.
Past efforts have failed, and numerous secret contacts yielded little. Significantly, analysts say Iran still smarts from being included in President Bush's "axis of evil," after giving critical help to the US during and after the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan.
"The main issue here is 'What will be the answer?' " says a Western diplomat in Tehran. "The Iranians are very confused. The Americans are still discussing the best strategy, but they know what they want. Here, I am not so sure. Iran has been a revolutionary state for 30 years and needs a crisis, an enemy to survive.
"If the archfoe is not the archfoe, then what?" asks the diplomat. "If Obama were to officially make a request tomorrow, there would be shock here…. They want [to engage] – it's clear – but the question is how to do this without losing face."
Already Ahmadinejad has broken the anti-US taboo and analysts say Iran now has certain expectations in return. State Department officials have been drafting letters to break the ice, and are debating whether the US should reach out before Iran's election. But such a move could give Ahmadinejad a boost over challengers like former President Mohammad Khatami, a reformist who won elections in 1997 and 2001 by a landslide but was still unable to break the US-Iran deadlock.
Window of opportunity before Iranian elections
In Iran, some argue that if the US does not send a message before the Iran election, it will show a US preference in the vote and be seen as meddling. Others point out that only Ahmadinejad has the rightwing gravitas to reassure hard-liners.
A swift American move may produce better results, says Mohebian, with a "short, polite" letter to Ahmadinejad from Obama, thanking him for his note and "hoping to make a new reality."
"But the main letter – to solve the problems – should be sent to the Leader," says Mohebian. This letter should acknowledge past historical grievances – such as the CIA-orchestrated coup in 1953 – and suggest: "It's better to forget the past. The Islamic Republic is a reality. We want a new future," he says.
"After that you will see the situation change – not immediately, but gradually over two years," says Mohebian. During that time, both sides would have to commit to new policies. Khamenei could portray the change as one of strength, not weakness, he says.
But is such a scenario possible? Even those close to ruling circles caution that Iran's reaction will depend upon US actions. And they can't predict how far the Islamic system is willing to budge.
"The first thing Iranian leaders need is to be convinced the US is not after regime change," says a veteran analyst in Tehran. The regime "wants" to engage, though "only someone deep in the religious establishment can do it and Ahmadinejad has the credentials. But he also must keep his revolutionary image and rhetoric."
"I would really like reformists to rule the country – it's better," says this analyst. "But in these crucial issues, they will be crippled if they try rapprochement…. If strange things happen and Ahmadinejad and Khamenei are doing it, they can't stop [hard-line reaction], but can convince them to go along."
Yet there is plenty of room for doubt, says a reformist political scientist in Tehran: "They rule the country based on their opposition to the US. If they change there is no basis for their legitimacy," he says. "Ahmadinejad is very, very interested in resuming negotiations with the US, but the leader does not allow it [because] anyone who does that will be a big hero in Iran."
The CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR
"Opposing the Zionist regime and defending oppressed people are among the pillars of the Islamic revolution and Iran and America's relationship will not change because of Obama taking office," said cleric Ali Maboudi, in a Fars News Agency report quoted by Reuters.
American officials are deciding how to approach Iran – and when, considering Ahmadinejad is up for reelection in June – to maximize chances of success on issues from Iran's nuclear ambitions to its regional role. The US has long labeled Iran the "premier state sponsor of terror" for supporting Hezbollah and Hamas and accused it of causing US deaths in Iraq by supporting Shiite militias.
Past efforts have failed, and numerous secret contacts yielded little. Significantly, analysts say Iran still smarts from being included in President Bush's "axis of evil," after giving critical help to the US during and after the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan.
"The main issue here is 'What will be the answer?' " says a Western diplomat in Tehran. "The Iranians are very confused. The Americans are still discussing the best strategy, but they know what they want. Here, I am not so sure. Iran has been a revolutionary state for 30 years and needs a crisis, an enemy to survive.
"If the archfoe is not the archfoe, then what?" asks the diplomat. "If Obama were to officially make a request tomorrow, there would be shock here…. They want [to engage] – it's clear – but the question is how to do this without losing face."
Already Ahmadinejad has broken the anti-US taboo and analysts say Iran now has certain expectations in return. State Department officials have been drafting letters to break the ice, and are debating whether the US should reach out before Iran's election. But such a move could give Ahmadinejad a boost over challengers like former President Mohammad Khatami, a reformist who won elections in 1997 and 2001 by a landslide but was still unable to break the US-Iran deadlock.
Window of opportunity before Iranian elections
In Iran, some argue that if the US does not send a message before the Iran election, it will show a US preference in the vote and be seen as meddling. Others point out that only Ahmadinejad has the rightwing gravitas to reassure hard-liners.
A swift American move may produce better results, says Mohebian, with a "short, polite" letter to Ahmadinejad from Obama, thanking him for his note and "hoping to make a new reality."
"But the main letter – to solve the problems – should be sent to the Leader," says Mohebian. This letter should acknowledge past historical grievances – such as the CIA-orchestrated coup in 1953 – and suggest: "It's better to forget the past. The Islamic Republic is a reality. We want a new future," he says.
"After that you will see the situation change – not immediately, but gradually over two years," says Mohebian. During that time, both sides would have to commit to new policies. Khamenei could portray the change as one of strength, not weakness, he says.
But is such a scenario possible? Even those close to ruling circles caution that Iran's reaction will depend upon US actions. And they can't predict how far the Islamic system is willing to budge.
"The first thing Iranian leaders need is to be convinced the US is not after regime change," says a veteran analyst in Tehran. The regime "wants" to engage, though "only someone deep in the religious establishment can do it and Ahmadinejad has the credentials. But he also must keep his revolutionary image and rhetoric."
"I would really like reformists to rule the country – it's better," says this analyst. "But in these crucial issues, they will be crippled if they try rapprochement…. If strange things happen and Ahmadinejad and Khamenei are doing it, they can't stop [hard-line reaction], but can convince them to go along."
Yet there is plenty of room for doubt, says a reformist political scientist in Tehran: "They rule the country based on their opposition to the US. If they change there is no basis for their legitimacy," he says. "Ahmadinejad is very, very interested in resuming negotiations with the US, but the leader does not allow it [because] anyone who does that will be a big hero in Iran."
West threatens Iran sanctions, offers talks
MUNICH, Germany (Reuters) - Western powers said on Saturday Iran risked isolation and more sanctions if it did not comply with demands to rein in its nuclear program, but Washington also reaffirmed its offer for talk with Tehran.Speaking at the Munich Security Conference during his first trip to Europe as U.S. vice president, Joe Biden said the international community had to work together to convince Iran to forgo the development of nuclear weapons.
"We will be willing to talk to Iran, and to offer a very clear choice: continue down your current course and there will be pressure and isolation; abandon the illicit nuclear program and your support for terrorism and there will be meaningful incentives," Biden said.
Biden's comments chimed with remarks by German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who said Berlin hoped for a diplomatic solution to the dispute, but added:
"I think the new U.S. administration will make its approach toward Iran clear to us in coming months....We are ready to walk this path together. But we are also ready for tougher sanctions if there is no progress."
French President Sarkozy told the same conference there was no alternative to tightening sanctions against Iran if it does not meet western demands. He called on Russia to cooperate with other powers on such a move. "We need the Russians to help so that sanctions against Iran are effective," Sarkozy said.
"We have only one solution left, reinforce sanctions against Iran and link Russia to this process...It is up to Russia to decide which face it wants to show. If it wants peace it should show it. If it wants to be a (global player), it should help us with Iran," he said.
Sarkozy said Iran's announcement it had launched a satellite into orbit for the first time was "extremely bad news."
LARIJANI-SOLANA TALKS
Ali Larijani, the speaker of Iran's parliament, told the conference on Friday the new White House could rebuild some of the bridges that had been destroyed by the Bush administration.
But he said this required a "pragmatic strategy based on fair play" and he questioned whether a change of tone from Obama really meant the United States was prepared to work toward a diplomatic solution with Iran.
EU foreign policy chief Javier Solona, who met Larijani for talks on the sidelines of the conference, called Washington's offer of talks a "very, very important change."
"The Iranians have to think very very carefully about the meaning of that and contribute also with a positive response," Solana, who has led Western negotiation efforts with Iran, told reporters in Munich.
An EU diplomat, referring to the talks with Larijani, said: "(Larijani) was in a very, very good mood -- very tranquil -- they know that something is moving so they have to push for it."
The U.N. Security Council has imposed three rounds of sanctions on Iran for refusing to suspend uranium enrichment. Western powers suspect the work is aimed at building an atomic bomb. Tehran says it is for peaceful power generation only.
By Kerstin Gehmlich and Noah Barkin
Reuters
Obama administration offers olive branch to Russia and Iran
• US to put European missile shield plans on hold
• Biden says willing to discuss Iran's nuclear plans
The Obama administration sought to mend fences with Moscow today after years of drifting into hostility, offering to shelve the Pentagon's contentious missile shield in central Europe and to work with the Russians on arms control and a host of other issues.
In the first major foreign policy speech from the new US administration, the vice-president, Joe Biden, stated categorically that Washington wanted to negotiate for the first time with Iran about the country's nuclear ambitions.
Biden's keenly awaited speech to the annual Munich security conference signalled a radical break with the neo-conservative foreign policies of the Bush White House.
"There is no conflict between our security and our ideals. We believe they are mutually reinforcing," the vice-president said. "The example of our power must be matched by the power of our example.
"America will not torture. We will uphold the rights of those we bring to justice. We will close Guantánamo."
But he warned his European allies that the fresh start in US foreign policy would come with a price tag.
"As we seek a lasting framework for our common struggle against extremism, we will have to work co-operatively with nations around the world – and we will need your help … America will do more. That's the good news. The bad news is that America will ask for more from our partners as well."
While Biden offered the Russians a policy shift towards co-operation and consultation, Barack Obama's national security adviser, General James Jones, told the Observer that plans to put parts of the Pentagon's missile shield in Poland and the Czech Republic – a project that Moscow says could trigger a new arms race – were being put on ice and that talks on the shield would be broadened.
"We're interested in having a fresh look at each of our [foreign] policies. We're undergoing major policy reviews. Missile defence is one of those policies being reviewed. We will consult with our friends and allies and we'll take a fresh look at it."
A senior Nato official said the president was "in no rush" to develop the missile shield. "This is an overture to the Russians. We'll need to see how the Russians respond. They're sending mixed signals."
Both Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, and the French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, emphasised the need for better relations with Moscow exactly two years after Vladimir Putin used the same Munich conference to deliver the most aggressive speech of his Russian presidency, accusing the Bush administration of seeking to rule the world and warning of a new cold war.
Biden said today: "The last few years have seen a dangerous drift in relations between Russia and our [Nato] alliance. It's time to press the reset button and to revisit the many areas where we can and should work together.
"We will continue to develop missile defences to counter a growing Iranian capability, provided the technology is proven and it is cost effective," he added. "We will do so in consultation with our Nato allies and with Russia."
Officials and diplomats said a major concern driving the policy shift towards Russia was Iran and its nuclear ambitions.
"Obama has about a year before the Iranians are in a position to develop a nuclear bomb," the Nato official said. "The problem is the Americans do not have any leverage. They need bigger sticks and bigger carrots."
Sarkozy voiced alarm at the Iranian issue, saying it warranted more attention. He denounced last week's launch of an Iranian satellite and said Russian support was needed to force a change in Tehran.
Merkel added that Germany was ready to tighten sanctions on Iran if necessary.
Diplomats said the Iranian dispute was likely to become the biggest challenge of the Obama presidency, along with the war in Afghanistan.
"Our administration is reviewing policy toward Iran, but this much is clear: We will be willing to talk," Biden said. "We will be willing to talk to Iran, and to offer a very clear choice: continue down your current course and there will be pressure and isolation; abandon the illicit nuclear programme and your support for terrorism and there will be meaningful incentives."
Ali Larijani, Iran's former chief nuclear negotiator and current parliament speaker, told the same meeting that the US was to blame for 50 years of hostility towards Tehran and that Washington would need to repent and apologise before there could be any breakthrough. There was no word of any contacts behind the scenes between the two sides.
Senior western officials said Obama's options appeared limited on Iran, adding that Israeli pressure for military strikes were the wild card should the west conclude that Tehran was on the brink of becoming a nuclear power. They added that Obama could choose to recognise Iran as a key power in the Middle East and to offer security guarantees and pledges of no regime change strategies.
"The Iranian people are a great people. The Persian civilisation is a great civilisation," Biden said. "But Iran has acted in ways that are not conducive to peace."
Guardian
In the first major foreign policy speech from the new US administration, the vice-president, Joe Biden, stated categorically that Washington wanted to negotiate for the first time with Iran about the country's nuclear ambitions.
Biden's keenly awaited speech to the annual Munich security conference signalled a radical break with the neo-conservative foreign policies of the Bush White House.
"There is no conflict between our security and our ideals. We believe they are mutually reinforcing," the vice-president said. "The example of our power must be matched by the power of our example.
"America will not torture. We will uphold the rights of those we bring to justice. We will close Guantánamo."
But he warned his European allies that the fresh start in US foreign policy would come with a price tag.
"As we seek a lasting framework for our common struggle against extremism, we will have to work co-operatively with nations around the world – and we will need your help … America will do more. That's the good news. The bad news is that America will ask for more from our partners as well."
While Biden offered the Russians a policy shift towards co-operation and consultation, Barack Obama's national security adviser, General James Jones, told the Observer that plans to put parts of the Pentagon's missile shield in Poland and the Czech Republic – a project that Moscow says could trigger a new arms race – were being put on ice and that talks on the shield would be broadened.
"We're interested in having a fresh look at each of our [foreign] policies. We're undergoing major policy reviews. Missile defence is one of those policies being reviewed. We will consult with our friends and allies and we'll take a fresh look at it."
A senior Nato official said the president was "in no rush" to develop the missile shield. "This is an overture to the Russians. We'll need to see how the Russians respond. They're sending mixed signals."
Both Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, and the French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, emphasised the need for better relations with Moscow exactly two years after Vladimir Putin used the same Munich conference to deliver the most aggressive speech of his Russian presidency, accusing the Bush administration of seeking to rule the world and warning of a new cold war.
Biden said today: "The last few years have seen a dangerous drift in relations between Russia and our [Nato] alliance. It's time to press the reset button and to revisit the many areas where we can and should work together.
"We will continue to develop missile defences to counter a growing Iranian capability, provided the technology is proven and it is cost effective," he added. "We will do so in consultation with our Nato allies and with Russia."
Officials and diplomats said a major concern driving the policy shift towards Russia was Iran and its nuclear ambitions.
"Obama has about a year before the Iranians are in a position to develop a nuclear bomb," the Nato official said. "The problem is the Americans do not have any leverage. They need bigger sticks and bigger carrots."
Sarkozy voiced alarm at the Iranian issue, saying it warranted more attention. He denounced last week's launch of an Iranian satellite and said Russian support was needed to force a change in Tehran.
Merkel added that Germany was ready to tighten sanctions on Iran if necessary.
Diplomats said the Iranian dispute was likely to become the biggest challenge of the Obama presidency, along with the war in Afghanistan.
"Our administration is reviewing policy toward Iran, but this much is clear: We will be willing to talk," Biden said. "We will be willing to talk to Iran, and to offer a very clear choice: continue down your current course and there will be pressure and isolation; abandon the illicit nuclear programme and your support for terrorism and there will be meaningful incentives."
Ali Larijani, Iran's former chief nuclear negotiator and current parliament speaker, told the same meeting that the US was to blame for 50 years of hostility towards Tehran and that Washington would need to repent and apologise before there could be any breakthrough. There was no word of any contacts behind the scenes between the two sides.
Senior western officials said Obama's options appeared limited on Iran, adding that Israeli pressure for military strikes were the wild card should the west conclude that Tehran was on the brink of becoming a nuclear power. They added that Obama could choose to recognise Iran as a key power in the Middle East and to offer security guarantees and pledges of no regime change strategies.
"The Iranian people are a great people. The Persian civilisation is a great civilisation," Biden said. "But Iran has acted in ways that are not conducive to peace."
Iran: US must rethink policies for reconciliation
MUNICH (AP) — Iran sternly dismissed decades of U.S. policies targeting Tehran and declared Friday that the new American administration had to admit past wrongs before it could hope for reconciliation.
The comments by Iranian parliamentary speaker Ali Larijani at an international security conference in Munich appeared to be the most detailed outline yet of Tehran's expectations from President Barack Obama's administration.
"The old carrot and stick policy must be discarded," he said, alluding to Western threats and offers of rewards to coax Iran to give up nuclear activities the West views as threatening. "This is a golden opportunity for the United States."
Obama has said the U.S. is ready for direct talks with Iran in efforts to overcome concerns that its nuclear program could be used to develop atomic weapons. Tehran denies that and insists its aims are peaceful. The former U.S. administration refused one-on-one negotiations with Tehran on the issue unless it made significant nuclear concessions beforehand.
There was no immediate U.S. reaction to Larijani's comments.
Vice President Joe Biden was due the conference Saturday and was expected to try to muster more European troops for Afghanistan. But there is no sign that general European favor for the new U.S. administration has overcome the reluctance of some allies to contribute more soldiers.
The U.S. plans to send 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan, roughly doubling its presence. But coming into the conference, German officials have reiterated that they do not want to commit to more forces. Still, German Chancellor Angela Merkel's spokesman said before the meetings that did not mean the door to such discussions was closed.
Biden, a former chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is expected to push allies at the conference for a greater share of the diplomatic, military and economic burdens confronting the Obama administration in Afghanistan and elsewhere.
Larijani evaded a question on whether he planned to meet with Biden, but said Washington needed to change its tactics in engaging Iran, "to a chess game from a boxing match."
Senior Iranian officials have cautiously welcomed the new U.S. proposal of direct talks. But on Friday, Larijani, his country's former chief nuclear negotiator, delivered a blistering condemnation of what he described as failed and evil U.S. actions against his country and in the region. He declared the U.S. had to own up to the past before it could hope for a better future with Iran.
"In the past years, the U.S. has burned many bridges but the new White House can rebuild them" if it "accepts its mistakes and changes its policies," Larijani said.
He condemned Washington's backing for Iraq in its 1980s war against Iran and its support of Israel. Larijani said those policies and others in the region failed in their declared purpose of rooting out terrorism and finding hidden weapons of mass destruction.
On the nuclear standoff, he said, Washington "has tried to sabotage any diplomatic solution." Without U.S. acknowledgment of failure and wrongdoing, "do you expect this pain to go away?" he asked.
Outside the conference, British Foreign Secretary David Miliband criticized Tehran's decision to launch a satellite this week, while Germany's foreign minister urged Iran to engage in direct diplomacy with the U.S.
Iran launched a satellite Monday — touching off concerns among experts in Europe, the U.S. and Israel about the potential for links between Iran's satellite program and its work with missiles and nuclear technology.
Speaking outside the gathering of a dozen world leaders and more than 50 top ministers, Miliband said that even if the launch was for civilian purposes as Iran claims, it sent the wrong signal, considering Obama's offer to talk directly to defuse the nuclear crisis.
"Given that President Obama said that he was stretching out a hand if Iran would unclench its fist, I don't think that this was an unclenching of a fist," Miliband told AP Television News.
He also urged Iran to work with the IAEA to disprove suspicions that its nuclear activities were geared toward producing weapons — and warned of new penalties if it does not.
"The commitment of the new American administration to engage with Iran is right and important, but if Iran defies international opinion then there inevitably have to be stronger and tougher sanctions," he said, referring to the possibility of new U.N. Security Council measures.
Larijani dismissed Miliband's concerns about the launch. "What possible causes for concern can that satellite be?" he asked. "This satellite is not a weapon of mass destruction."
The comments by Iranian parliamentary speaker Ali Larijani at an international security conference in Munich appeared to be the most detailed outline yet of Tehran's expectations from President Barack Obama's administration.
"The old carrot and stick policy must be discarded," he said, alluding to Western threats and offers of rewards to coax Iran to give up nuclear activities the West views as threatening. "This is a golden opportunity for the United States."
Obama has said the U.S. is ready for direct talks with Iran in efforts to overcome concerns that its nuclear program could be used to develop atomic weapons. Tehran denies that and insists its aims are peaceful. The former U.S. administration refused one-on-one negotiations with Tehran on the issue unless it made significant nuclear concessions beforehand.
There was no immediate U.S. reaction to Larijani's comments.
Vice President Joe Biden was due the conference Saturday and was expected to try to muster more European troops for Afghanistan. But there is no sign that general European favor for the new U.S. administration has overcome the reluctance of some allies to contribute more soldiers.
The U.S. plans to send 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan, roughly doubling its presence. But coming into the conference, German officials have reiterated that they do not want to commit to more forces. Still, German Chancellor Angela Merkel's spokesman said before the meetings that did not mean the door to such discussions was closed.
Biden, a former chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is expected to push allies at the conference for a greater share of the diplomatic, military and economic burdens confronting the Obama administration in Afghanistan and elsewhere.
Larijani evaded a question on whether he planned to meet with Biden, but said Washington needed to change its tactics in engaging Iran, "to a chess game from a boxing match."
Senior Iranian officials have cautiously welcomed the new U.S. proposal of direct talks. But on Friday, Larijani, his country's former chief nuclear negotiator, delivered a blistering condemnation of what he described as failed and evil U.S. actions against his country and in the region. He declared the U.S. had to own up to the past before it could hope for a better future with Iran.
"In the past years, the U.S. has burned many bridges but the new White House can rebuild them" if it "accepts its mistakes and changes its policies," Larijani said.
He condemned Washington's backing for Iraq in its 1980s war against Iran and its support of Israel. Larijani said those policies and others in the region failed in their declared purpose of rooting out terrorism and finding hidden weapons of mass destruction.
On the nuclear standoff, he said, Washington "has tried to sabotage any diplomatic solution." Without U.S. acknowledgment of failure and wrongdoing, "do you expect this pain to go away?" he asked.
Outside the conference, British Foreign Secretary David Miliband criticized Tehran's decision to launch a satellite this week, while Germany's foreign minister urged Iran to engage in direct diplomacy with the U.S.
Iran launched a satellite Monday — touching off concerns among experts in Europe, the U.S. and Israel about the potential for links between Iran's satellite program and its work with missiles and nuclear technology.
Speaking outside the gathering of a dozen world leaders and more than 50 top ministers, Miliband said that even if the launch was for civilian purposes as Iran claims, it sent the wrong signal, considering Obama's offer to talk directly to defuse the nuclear crisis.
"Given that President Obama said that he was stretching out a hand if Iran would unclench its fist, I don't think that this was an unclenching of a fist," Miliband told AP Television News.
He also urged Iran to work with the IAEA to disprove suspicions that its nuclear activities were geared toward producing weapons — and warned of new penalties if it does not.
"The commitment of the new American administration to engage with Iran is right and important, but if Iran defies international opinion then there inevitably have to be stronger and tougher sanctions," he said, referring to the possibility of new U.N. Security Council measures.
Larijani dismissed Miliband's concerns about the launch. "What possible causes for concern can that satellite be?" he asked. "This satellite is not a weapon of mass destruction."
Ap Associated Press
Iran: Human Rights in the spotlight on the 30th Anniversary of the Islamic Revolution
10 February 2009 marks the 30 year anniversary of the change in government in Iran that led to the creation of the Islamic Republic. Amnesty International is marking the date by raising its concerns over a range of human rights violations that have persisted over the past 30 years.
Previous governments appointed by the former Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi were widely regarded as corrupt and responsible for egregious human rights violations. The Islamic Republic of Iran was created following a nationwide referendum on 1 April 1979. Another referendum, in December 1979, approved the constitution and confirmed Ayatollah Khomeini as Supreme Leader.
Despite promises made by Ayatollah Khomeini that all Iranians would be free, the past 30 years has been characterised by persistent human rights violations. The vast scope and scale of those violations of the early years of the Islamic Republic did decline somewhat with time. Limited relaxation of restrictions on freedom of expression during the period of reform under former President Khatami raised hopes of a sustained improvement in the human rights situation, although the situation remained poor. However, these hopes have been firmly crushed since the accession to power of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Impunity, arbitrary arrest, torture and other ill-treatment, as well as the use of the death penalty remain prevalent. Some sectors of society – including ethnic minorities – continue to face widespread discrimination, while the situation for other groups – notably some religious minorities – has significantly worsened. Those seen as dissenting from stated or unstated official policies face severe restrictions on their rights to freedom of belief, expression, association and assembly. Women continue to face discrimination - both in law and practice. Impunity for human rights abuses is widespread.
Amnesty International has been documenting human rights violations in Iran since the middle of the 1960s. On the occasion of this anniversary, Amnesty International urges the Iranian authorities to:
• Release all prisoners of conscience: those imprisoned in Iran because of their political, religious or other conscientiously held beliefs, ethnic origin, language, national or social origin, sexual orientation or other status who have not used or advocated violence or hatred;
• Direct government, judicial and security officials to review the cases of all prisoners held for political reasons. This includes the release all political prisoners who were unfairly tried in previous years who should be retried under procedures which meet international standards for fair trial. Release those who have not yet been tried unless they are to be tried promptly and fairly on recognizably criminal charges;
• End impunity for past human rights violations, by fully investigating past abuses such as the 1988 mass killings of political prisoners, commonly known as the “prison massacres”;
• Make it clear to state officials that torture and other ill-treatment will not be tolerated and bring to justice anyone found responsible for such abuses;
• Reform key areas of the administration of justice to ensure that no one is arbitrarily arrested or subjected to unfair trial and that evidence obtained under torture and other ill-treatment is not admissible in courts.
Previous governments appointed by the former Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi were widely regarded as corrupt and responsible for egregious human rights violations. The Islamic Republic of Iran was created following a nationwide referendum on 1 April 1979. Another referendum, in December 1979, approved the constitution and confirmed Ayatollah Khomeini as Supreme Leader.
Despite promises made by Ayatollah Khomeini that all Iranians would be free, the past 30 years has been characterised by persistent human rights violations. The vast scope and scale of those violations of the early years of the Islamic Republic did decline somewhat with time. Limited relaxation of restrictions on freedom of expression during the period of reform under former President Khatami raised hopes of a sustained improvement in the human rights situation, although the situation remained poor. However, these hopes have been firmly crushed since the accession to power of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Impunity, arbitrary arrest, torture and other ill-treatment, as well as the use of the death penalty remain prevalent. Some sectors of society – including ethnic minorities – continue to face widespread discrimination, while the situation for other groups – notably some religious minorities – has significantly worsened. Those seen as dissenting from stated or unstated official policies face severe restrictions on their rights to freedom of belief, expression, association and assembly. Women continue to face discrimination - both in law and practice. Impunity for human rights abuses is widespread.
Amnesty International has been documenting human rights violations in Iran since the middle of the 1960s. On the occasion of this anniversary, Amnesty International urges the Iranian authorities to:
• Release all prisoners of conscience: those imprisoned in Iran because of their political, religious or other conscientiously held beliefs, ethnic origin, language, national or social origin, sexual orientation or other status who have not used or advocated violence or hatred;
• Direct government, judicial and security officials to review the cases of all prisoners held for political reasons. This includes the release all political prisoners who were unfairly tried in previous years who should be retried under procedures which meet international standards for fair trial. Release those who have not yet been tried unless they are to be tried promptly and fairly on recognizably criminal charges;
• End impunity for past human rights violations, by fully investigating past abuses such as the 1988 mass killings of political prisoners, commonly known as the “prison massacres”;
• Make it clear to state officials that torture and other ill-treatment will not be tolerated and bring to justice anyone found responsible for such abuses;
• Reform key areas of the administration of justice to ensure that no one is arbitrarily arrested or subjected to unfair trial and that evidence obtained under torture and other ill-treatment is not admissible in courts.
Amnesty International
Friday, February 6, 2009
Missing in Iran
In the nearly two years since Robert ''Bob'' Levinson of Coral Springs vanished during a trip to Iran in March 2007, the government of that country has done little to find out what happened to him. It claims to know nothing about the case, but there is some evidence to the contrary. Bob Levinson may even be alive. If nothing else, common decency and diplomatic convention should make Iran feel obligated to do what it can to clear up this case.
Retired from the FBI for nine years, Mr. Levinson was in Iran on private business. According to Florida Sen. Bill Nelson, who is aiding the family, the belief that Mr. Levinson is alive rests on solid ground. At least one person living in Iran claims the Florida man was detained there. Six weeks after the disappearance, Sen. Nelson adds, the official press arm of the Iranian government issued a press release that said Mr. Levinson was in custody and that his release was forthcoming.
The government subsequently changed its tune. Iranian officials properly promised to help wife Christine Levinson and other relatives during a visit in December of 2007, but little action has been forthcoming.
Sen. Nelson believes the government wants something in return. He may be right. Whenever U.S. officials or intermediaries raise the Levinson case, the Iranian government brushes it aside but then raises the issue of Iranians held by U.S. forces in Erbil, Iraq. If the Iranians are looking for a swap, they should say so, and U.S. officials should consider the merits of such action.
Members of Congress can help by supporting a resolution introduced by Sen. Nelson and U.S. Rep. Bob Wexler, D-Boca Raton. It calls on Iran to divulge information on the whereabouts of Bob Levinson. A South Florida family has been waiting for nearly two years to learn what happened to their husband and father. It is time to end their anguish.
Retired from the FBI for nine years, Mr. Levinson was in Iran on private business. According to Florida Sen. Bill Nelson, who is aiding the family, the belief that Mr. Levinson is alive rests on solid ground. At least one person living in Iran claims the Florida man was detained there. Six weeks after the disappearance, Sen. Nelson adds, the official press arm of the Iranian government issued a press release that said Mr. Levinson was in custody and that his release was forthcoming.
The government subsequently changed its tune. Iranian officials properly promised to help wife Christine Levinson and other relatives during a visit in December of 2007, but little action has been forthcoming.
Sen. Nelson believes the government wants something in return. He may be right. Whenever U.S. officials or intermediaries raise the Levinson case, the Iranian government brushes it aside but then raises the issue of Iranians held by U.S. forces in Erbil, Iraq. If the Iranians are looking for a swap, they should say so, and U.S. officials should consider the merits of such action.
Members of Congress can help by supporting a resolution introduced by Sen. Nelson and U.S. Rep. Bob Wexler, D-Boca Raton. It calls on Iran to divulge information on the whereabouts of Bob Levinson. A South Florida family has been waiting for nearly two years to learn what happened to their husband and father. It is time to end their anguish.
Miami Herald
Iran's situation explosive
Normally, a satellite launch isn’t newsworthy. They happen all the time. But Iran’s launch of its first domestically built satellite this week is a very big deal for U.S. national security.
Like its “civilian” nuclear efforts that remained undeclared for two decades, long-range ballistic missiles are likely being developed under cover of Iran’s space program. Indeed, Tehran’s space work could lead to the development of an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) able to reach all of Europe and the United States with a WMD payload.
Fact is, with this successful launch Tuesday, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s Iran has moved one step closer to developing that ICBM capability. More launches are expected.
In theory, if you can launch a ballistic missile that can place a satellite into Earth orbit, you have the scientific wherewithal to hit a target anywhere on Earth with a warhead.
This inconvenient truth is particularly unnerving if you - as many do - believe Iran is involved in developing a nuclear weapon.
Remember: Moscow’s launch of its first satellite, Sputnik, in 1957 meant not only had the Russians bested us scientifically, but a Soviet ICBM capability wasn’t far behind. In addition, even though Tehran insists its space program is for peaceful purposes - just like its nuclear program - its space efforts follow an unnerving proliferation pattern.
In the late 1990s, North Korea also used a “civilian” space program to clandestinely build and test a ballistic missile with intercontinental potential.
Another troubling sign is Iran launched its satellite ahead of schedule. Just last year, Tehran said it would send its first indigenously-produced satellite into space in mid-2009.
One has to wonder whether Iran is receiving outside assistance. (Russia? North Korea?) Fortunately, while Iran has made progress in developing an ICBM, it’s not there yet. Tehran still needs more advanced rocketry.
Experts estimate a sufficiently-energetic Iranian two-stage ballistic missile could reach all of Europe - plus America’s East Coast; one with three stages could range the whole of the U.S.
(Iran can already range all of the Middle East and parts of southeastern Europe with its North Korea-assisted Shahab-series missiles.)
A warhead is also needed, one that could withstand the great pressures and heats of intercontinental flight. But
Iran seems to be working on that, too. According to an IAEA report of last summer, Iran is redesigning the payload chamber of the “Shahab-3 missile re-entry vehicle to accommodate a nuclear warhead.”
Setting the ICBM issue aside, it’s also unsettling that Iran now has the capability to build and launch its own satellites. (Russia launched Iran’s only other satellite in 2005.)
This new capability means Iran will likely be developing a satellite architecture that could also be used for conventional military purposes.
Tehran could field military satellites which would aid Iran in battle by relaying secure communications, gathering intelligence, providing early warning and weapons’ targeting.
None of this is good news, especially considering Iran’s long-standing hostility toward the United States, sponsorship of terrorism, involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan, and regional great power ambitions.
Peter Brookes is a Heritage Foundation senior fellow and a former deputy assistant secretary of defense.
Like its “civilian” nuclear efforts that remained undeclared for two decades, long-range ballistic missiles are likely being developed under cover of Iran’s space program. Indeed, Tehran’s space work could lead to the development of an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) able to reach all of Europe and the United States with a WMD payload.
Fact is, with this successful launch Tuesday, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s Iran has moved one step closer to developing that ICBM capability. More launches are expected.
In theory, if you can launch a ballistic missile that can place a satellite into Earth orbit, you have the scientific wherewithal to hit a target anywhere on Earth with a warhead.
This inconvenient truth is particularly unnerving if you - as many do - believe Iran is involved in developing a nuclear weapon.
Remember: Moscow’s launch of its first satellite, Sputnik, in 1957 meant not only had the Russians bested us scientifically, but a Soviet ICBM capability wasn’t far behind. In addition, even though Tehran insists its space program is for peaceful purposes - just like its nuclear program - its space efforts follow an unnerving proliferation pattern.
In the late 1990s, North Korea also used a “civilian” space program to clandestinely build and test a ballistic missile with intercontinental potential.
Another troubling sign is Iran launched its satellite ahead of schedule. Just last year, Tehran said it would send its first indigenously-produced satellite into space in mid-2009.
One has to wonder whether Iran is receiving outside assistance. (Russia? North Korea?) Fortunately, while Iran has made progress in developing an ICBM, it’s not there yet. Tehran still needs more advanced rocketry.
Experts estimate a sufficiently-energetic Iranian two-stage ballistic missile could reach all of Europe - plus America’s East Coast; one with three stages could range the whole of the U.S.
(Iran can already range all of the Middle East and parts of southeastern Europe with its North Korea-assisted Shahab-series missiles.)
A warhead is also needed, one that could withstand the great pressures and heats of intercontinental flight. But
Iran seems to be working on that, too. According to an IAEA report of last summer, Iran is redesigning the payload chamber of the “Shahab-3 missile re-entry vehicle to accommodate a nuclear warhead.”
Setting the ICBM issue aside, it’s also unsettling that Iran now has the capability to build and launch its own satellites. (Russia launched Iran’s only other satellite in 2005.)
This new capability means Iran will likely be developing a satellite architecture that could also be used for conventional military purposes.
Tehran could field military satellites which would aid Iran in battle by relaying secure communications, gathering intelligence, providing early warning and weapons’ targeting.
None of this is good news, especially considering Iran’s long-standing hostility toward the United States, sponsorship of terrorism, involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan, and regional great power ambitions.
Peter Brookes is a Heritage Foundation senior fellow and a former deputy assistant secretary of defense.
Boston Herald
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Baloch News Agency - BalochNA
خبرگزاری بلوچ نیوز
.
..
Baloch News Agency
..
.
BalochNA
http://www.balochna.blogspot.com/ : Persian
http://www.baloshna.blogspot.com/ : Arabic
http://www.balochnewsagency.blogspot.com/ : Ehglish
Obama's outreach to Iran may be backed by tougher sanctions
WASHINGTON: The Obama administration may take a tough line with Tehran in coming months even as it signals a willingness to move toward direct talks with Iranian officials, according to President Barack Obama's aides and outside experts who have consulted with the government about Iran. While Obama is expected to soften the Bush administration's line against talking to Iran, the aides said, he also may seek to toughen sanctions. Iran's announcement Tuesday that it had launched its first satellite into orbit - a matter that Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, described as being of "acute concern to this administration" - may reinforce the impulse to get tough. "This action does not convince us that Iran is acting responsibly to advance stability or security in the region," Gibbs said, adding that the Obama administration "will use all elements of our national power to deal with Iran and to help it be a responsible member of the international community."A further indication of Obama's approach could come on Wednesday, when William Burns, the under secretary of state for political affairs, is to meet in Germany with world powers seeking to rein in Iran's nuclear ambitions.Obama told the Arabic language television station Al Arabiya last week that "if countries like Iran are willing to unclench their fist, they will find an extended hand from us." But among the circle of experts advising Obama on Iran, several have also advocated increasing the pressure on Tehran.Dennis Ross, the longtime Middle East peace negotiator who is expected to be named to a senior post handling Iran, has long argued that the United States must persuade its European allies to increase economic pressure on Iran. A Bipartisan Policy Center task force that included Ross issued a report in September saying "the Europeans make war more likely if they do not strengthen sanctions against Iran and effectively end all commercial relations."Gary Samore, a former arms-control negotiator in the Clinton administration who is expected to become Obama's nonproliferation czar, has argued that any carrot offered to Iran should be accompanied by a bigger stick.Aides to Obama say Samore has favored offering Tehran warmer relations with the United States, including lifting certain American sanctions and assuring the Iranian leadership that the United States will not pursue regime change. (Vice President Joseph Biden Jr. has said that he thought the United States should assure Iran that it would not pursue regime change.)But Samore has also argued that such an offer is not enough unless if comes backed by the threat of stronger sanctions from the United States, Europe, Russia and China - like, for instance, a ban on foreign investment in Iran's oil and gas industry.The aides, along with other advisers, spoke about the direction of Iran policy on condition of anonymity because of the delicacy of the matter.Both Samore and Ross are listed on the Web site for United Against Nuclear Iran, an organization dedicated to stopping Iran from getting nuclear weapons. The Web site lists Samore as a member of the group's advisory board and Ross as a co-founder.The goal of getting Iran to agree to suspend its uranium enrichment has eluded the Bush administration and America's European allies, in part, some foreign policy analysts say, because Russia, China, and some European countries have balked at the idea of increasing economic pressure on Iran.Obama's aides are hoping he can talk those countries into doing for him what they were unwilling to do for Bush."I think Obama's trip in April will be very important," one administration official said, referring to Obama's expected trip to attend the NATO summit meeting in Strasbourg, where he will meet with a number of European leaders for the first time as president.Some Europeans have signaled that they are open to additional sanctions against Iran, viewing them as a diplomatic lever that could lead to direct talks between the United States and Iran."We want to be helpful in making sure that the outstretched hand of President Obama is a strong hand," the German foreign minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, said in an interview after his first meeting with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.Several European diplomats said France, Britain and Germany might be willing to consider sanctions if the Obama administration makes an effort to improve the atmosphere with Iran first.Obama's aides said no decision has been made about how to proceed on Iran."We're still reviewing Iran policy," said Robert Wood, the acting State Department spokesman. Indeed, Ross has yet to be named to his new post. And while Clinton also struck a conciliatory note toward Iran last week, Obama's top aides have yet to sit down for a substantive meeting on Iran, administration officials said.American policy is also likely to be complicated by presidential elections scheduled for June in Iran. An overture by the United States would raise two risks, experts say: that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would benefit politically from such a gesture, and that he might choose to rebuff Washington to score political points before the voting.At the same time, several experts said the Obama administration cannot afford to sit on its hands, in part because any further delay in persuading Iran to change course would give Tehran more time to enrich uranium."Coming out of the barrel like a jack-in-box, saying, 'Meet us in two days in Geneva for talks,' would be a mistake," said Thomas Pickering, a former under secretary of state for political affairs who has taken part in unofficial contacts with Iranian officials. "But you have to pursue negotiations, regardless," he said. "To wait around for a more favorable president is not a good idea."Pickering and other Iran experts favor a series of "confidence-building steps," which could open the door to more substantive direct contacts. Among those could be the opening of an American interests section in Tehran, a low-level diplomatic outpost.That would enable the United States to issue visas to Iranians in Tehran, rather than forcing them to go outside the country to apply, as is now the case.The two countries could also improve communication between their navies in the Gulf, which has been poor ever since 1988, when an American guided-missile cruiser shot down an Iranian passenger jet that commanders said had been mistaken for a fighter jet.U.S. athletes' visas withheldIran has not issued visas for the American women's badminton team that was to take part in a tournament in Tehran because of the team's late application, The Associated Press reported Wednesday, citing the Iranian Foreign Ministry.The U.S. team had been expected to arrive in Tehran on Wednesday from Dubai. It was to have been the first U.S.-Iranian exchange under the Obama administration and had been seen as part of a new U.S. approach to engage Iran.The 12-member team - eight female players and four coaches and managers representing USA Badminton - was to have competed in the Iran Fajr International Badminton Tournament, which begins on Friday.The U.S. State Department said Monday that the American squad had been invited by the Iranian Badminton Federation and that it hoped to extend an invitation to Iran's national team to come to the United States in July.Previous U.S.-Iranian sports exchanges, which started in January 2007, have included wrestlers and weightlifters as well as basketball, table tennis and water polo players. Since then, the department has sent 32 American athletes to Iran and brought 75 Iranian athletes and coaches to the United States, it said.
Herals Tribune
Merkel, Sarkozy Threaten More Iran Sanctions, Sueddeutsche Says
Germany and France may seek further sanctions against Iran if it fails to halt its nuclear program, both nations’ leaders said in an article in German newspaper Sueddeutsche Zeitung. “We will not permit an Iranian nuclear bomb because this would threaten world peace,” German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy said in the joint article published in the Munich-based newspaper today. While both welcomed President Barack Obama’s offer of talks with Iran, Merkel and Sarkozy said they would back “new, very resolute sanctions if necessary” to halt the Iranian threat. The two leaders said Europe must do more to speak with a single voice in foreign affairs and that they are ready “to develop and restore trusting relations” with Russia after last year’s war between Russia and Georgia.
Bloomberg News
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Kyrgyzstan to shut down NATO's air base
Kyrgyzstan has decided to shut down the Manas Air Base used by NATO to supply its troops in Afghanistan. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization has been insisting on its closure since 2005.
Kyrgyz President Kurmanbek Bakiyev explained the decision was made due to economic considerations and the negative public attitude."When there were hostilities in progress in Afghanistan with the use of combat aircraft, Kyrgyzstan made its territory available for fighting international terrorism. But at that time, it was one or two years that were being talked about. Eight years have passed. We have repeatedly raised with the United States the matter of economic compensation for the existence of the base in Kyrgyzstan, but we have not been understood,” he said.Still, Russia and Kyrgyzstan will continue cooperating with the United States on Afghanistan after the closure of the U.S. airbase in the ex-Soviet Central Asian state, the Russian president said on Tuesday."We could join our efforts to promote stability in the region, our countries will help the operations underway in the region. We are ready for coordinated action," said Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, adding that the decision to close the Manas base was up to Kyrgyzstan.Manas airport in Bishkek has been home to a thousand-strong American airbase since 2001, the year Kyrgyzstan joined the anti-terror coalition set up after 9/11. The US base used to be the main hub for moving men, equipment and supplies to US and allied forces operating in nearby Afghanistan because of its 90-minute flying time to the war, instead of seven hours from other launching areas.
Kyrgyz President Kurmanbek Bakiyev explained the decision was made due to economic considerations and the negative public attitude."When there were hostilities in progress in Afghanistan with the use of combat aircraft, Kyrgyzstan made its territory available for fighting international terrorism. But at that time, it was one or two years that were being talked about. Eight years have passed. We have repeatedly raised with the United States the matter of economic compensation for the existence of the base in Kyrgyzstan, but we have not been understood,” he said.Still, Russia and Kyrgyzstan will continue cooperating with the United States on Afghanistan after the closure of the U.S. airbase in the ex-Soviet Central Asian state, the Russian president said on Tuesday."We could join our efforts to promote stability in the region, our countries will help the operations underway in the region. We are ready for coordinated action," said Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, adding that the decision to close the Manas base was up to Kyrgyzstan.Manas airport in Bishkek has been home to a thousand-strong American airbase since 2001, the year Kyrgyzstan joined the anti-terror coalition set up after 9/11. The US base used to be the main hub for moving men, equipment and supplies to US and allied forces operating in nearby Afghanistan because of its 90-minute flying time to the war, instead of seven hours from other launching areas.
RT Russia Today
Iran launches first domestically produced satellite
Omid launch likely to stoke western fears of missile capabilities
Iran today claimed it had broken into the global space race after launching the country's first domestically produced satellite into orbit, in a move that will intensify western fears over its missile capabilities.
State television showed footage of the Omid (Hope) satellite being sent into space in a launch clearly timed to mark the 30th anniversary celebrations of the 1979 Islamic revolution.
"In another achievement for Iranian scientists under sanctions, Iran launched its first homemade Omid satellite into orbit," an Iranian TV report said. "It was carried into orbit by Iran-made satellite carrier Safir."
The reports said the Omid was equipped with experimental satellite control devices and power supply systems and was designed for gathering information and testing equipment.
The Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, hailed the launch as a historic event aimed at "expanding monotheism, peace and justice". He said the satellite, which he claimed had telecommunications capabilities, had reached its orbit and had made contact with ground stations, although not all of its functions were active yet.
The launch drew criticism from the Obama administration, with a White House spokesman expressing "acute concern".
"Efforts to develop missile delivery capability, efforts that continue on an illicit nuclear program, or threats that Iran makes toward Israel, and its sponsorship of terror are of acute concern to this administration," the spokesman, Robert Gibbs, said.
While Tehran insists the satellite will enable it to improve phone and internet technology and to track natural disasters, western analysts have warned that it would create the capacity to launch intercontinental ballistic missiles.
Today's launch makes Iran the 11th country to put a satellite into orbit since the Soviet Union launched the first in 1957.
It comes almost exactly a year after Iran launched the Kavosh-I (Explorer-1), a rocket capable of carrying satellites into space. That event, which also marked the opening of an Iranian space centre at an undisclosed desert location, was condemned as "unfortunate" by the US.
It was followed by months of careful rehearsals for today's event, which included the launch of a dummy satellite last August and the firing of a second rocket, the Kavosh-2, into space in November.
Iranian scientists have been working on a space programme for at least a decade. Early efforts involved co-operation with Russia. In October 2005, a Russian rocket launched Iran's first satellite, the Sina-1, which carried photographic and telecommunications equipment.
The announcement of the Omid's launch comes as officials from the US, Russia, Britain, France, Germany and China are due to meet near Frankfurt tomorrw to talk about Iran's nuclear program.
The group has offered Iran a package of incentives if it suspends uranium enrichment and enters into talks on its nuclear program. The UN Security Council has imposed sanctions to pressure Iran to comply.
Speaking at the African Union summit in Addis Ababa, Iran's foreign minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, insisted the country's new satellite was for "peaceful purposes" and said the western powers were intent on depriving it of the latest technological developments.
"Iran's satellite technology is for purely peaceful purposes and to meet the needs of the country," he said. "Satellites are a very essential means of gathering environmental data, climate data... and lots of necessary information that we need for technological, agricultural and economic projects," he said. "The difference between our country and some countries which have these capacities is that we believe science belongs to all humanity. Some people believe that advanced technologies belong to some countries exclusively.
"In Iran's history, in the last 100 years, you cannot point to aggression by Iran against any nation. Iran's people are peace-loving - they want peace with all countries around the world."
State television showed footage of the Omid (Hope) satellite being sent into space in a launch clearly timed to mark the 30th anniversary celebrations of the 1979 Islamic revolution.
"In another achievement for Iranian scientists under sanctions, Iran launched its first homemade Omid satellite into orbit," an Iranian TV report said. "It was carried into orbit by Iran-made satellite carrier Safir."
The reports said the Omid was equipped with experimental satellite control devices and power supply systems and was designed for gathering information and testing equipment.
The Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, hailed the launch as a historic event aimed at "expanding monotheism, peace and justice". He said the satellite, which he claimed had telecommunications capabilities, had reached its orbit and had made contact with ground stations, although not all of its functions were active yet.
The launch drew criticism from the Obama administration, with a White House spokesman expressing "acute concern".
"Efforts to develop missile delivery capability, efforts that continue on an illicit nuclear program, or threats that Iran makes toward Israel, and its sponsorship of terror are of acute concern to this administration," the spokesman, Robert Gibbs, said.
While Tehran insists the satellite will enable it to improve phone and internet technology and to track natural disasters, western analysts have warned that it would create the capacity to launch intercontinental ballistic missiles.
Today's launch makes Iran the 11th country to put a satellite into orbit since the Soviet Union launched the first in 1957.
It comes almost exactly a year after Iran launched the Kavosh-I (Explorer-1), a rocket capable of carrying satellites into space. That event, which also marked the opening of an Iranian space centre at an undisclosed desert location, was condemned as "unfortunate" by the US.
It was followed by months of careful rehearsals for today's event, which included the launch of a dummy satellite last August and the firing of a second rocket, the Kavosh-2, into space in November.
Iranian scientists have been working on a space programme for at least a decade. Early efforts involved co-operation with Russia. In October 2005, a Russian rocket launched Iran's first satellite, the Sina-1, which carried photographic and telecommunications equipment.
The announcement of the Omid's launch comes as officials from the US, Russia, Britain, France, Germany and China are due to meet near Frankfurt tomorrw to talk about Iran's nuclear program.
The group has offered Iran a package of incentives if it suspends uranium enrichment and enters into talks on its nuclear program. The UN Security Council has imposed sanctions to pressure Iran to comply.
Speaking at the African Union summit in Addis Ababa, Iran's foreign minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, insisted the country's new satellite was for "peaceful purposes" and said the western powers were intent on depriving it of the latest technological developments.
"Iran's satellite technology is for purely peaceful purposes and to meet the needs of the country," he said. "Satellites are a very essential means of gathering environmental data, climate data... and lots of necessary information that we need for technological, agricultural and economic projects," he said. "The difference between our country and some countries which have these capacities is that we believe science belongs to all humanity. Some people believe that advanced technologies belong to some countries exclusively.
"In Iran's history, in the last 100 years, you cannot point to aggression by Iran against any nation. Iran's people are peace-loving - they want peace with all countries around the world."
Guardian
Ample time to deal with Iran, IAEA chief says
Reuters
Published: February 02, 2009, 22:54
Vienna: Iran could gain the capability to make a nuclear weapon in 2-5 years but there is ample time to deal with the concern, the head of the United Nations' nuclear watchdog said in a televised interview.
Mohammad Al Baradei, director-general of the Vienna-based UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said that after stockpiling enriched uranium, Iran would face further technical and political hurdles should it seek to build nuclear arms.
"There is a concern, but don't hype the concern," Al Baradei, alluding mainly to US and Israeli warnings, said in a CNN interview broadcast late on Sunday. "There is ample time to engage [Iran] and reverse the concern and to move into more engagement rather than more isolation."
Al Baradei said that for Iran to have weapons capacity, it would have to eject IAEA inspectors, leave the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), reconfigure production to refine uranium to the high degree needed for bomb fuel and fit the material into a warhead:
"Even if I go by the CIA and other US intelligence, the estimations [are] that even if they go through all these scenarios, we're still talking about two to five years from now."
Western powers believe Iran's declared programme to refine uranium to the low level required for civilian nuclear energy is a front for gaining the means to reprocess it into highly enriched material for bombs at short notice.
Iran insists its nuclear ambitions are for peaceful purposes.
Vienna: Iran could gain the capability to make a nuclear weapon in 2-5 years but there is ample time to deal with the concern, the head of the United Nations' nuclear watchdog said in a televised interview.
Mohammad Al Baradei, director-general of the Vienna-based UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said that after stockpiling enriched uranium, Iran would face further technical and political hurdles should it seek to build nuclear arms.
"There is a concern, but don't hype the concern," Al Baradei, alluding mainly to US and Israeli warnings, said in a CNN interview broadcast late on Sunday. "There is ample time to engage [Iran] and reverse the concern and to move into more engagement rather than more isolation."
Al Baradei said that for Iran to have weapons capacity, it would have to eject IAEA inspectors, leave the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), reconfigure production to refine uranium to the high degree needed for bomb fuel and fit the material into a warhead:
"Even if I go by the CIA and other US intelligence, the estimations [are] that even if they go through all these scenarios, we're still talking about two to five years from now."
Western powers believe Iran's declared programme to refine uranium to the low level required for civilian nuclear energy is a front for gaining the means to reprocess it into highly enriched material for bombs at short notice.
Iran insists its nuclear ambitions are for peaceful purposes.
Gulf News
Iran Launches Satellite in a Challenge for Obama
Iran said Tuesday that it had launched its first domestically produced satellite, a move that has prompted concerns in the United States and other nations about Iran’s nuclear ambitions and its ability to deploy long-range ballistic missiles.The launch on Monday, coinciding with celebrations marking the 30th anniversary of the Islamic revolution, also creates an early challenge for President Obama, who has sought to strike a conciliatory tone toward Iran by conditionally offering dialogue after years of tensions. The United States and other nations believe Tehran wants to develop nuclear weapons, a charge that Iran’s leaders deny.
Iran said it had also used a domestically produced rocket to launch the satellite. That would make it part of the exclusive club of states that can loft objects into orbit, which now numbers at least nine. Weapons experts say the same technology used to put satellites into orbit can also be used for launching weapons.
In Washington, State Department spokesman Robert Wood called the reports a matter of “great concern” and potentially in violation of United Nations agreements limiting Iran from missile activity.
“Developing a space launch vehicle that could be put a satellite into orbit could possibly lead to the development of a ballistic missile system,” he said.
The head of Israel’s Space Agency, Zvi Kaplan, said initial reports showed that a satellite had been launched.
“From what I have been investigating it is true,” he said, according to The Associated Press. “We are not surprised because in this day and age of information and technology and with Iranian scientists studying abroad they can obtain the knowledge.”
The official Iranian news agency, IRNA, said the satellite was launched using a Safir-2 rocket and was “successfully sent into orbit.”
The satellite, which weighed about 60 pounds, is named Omid, or Hope, IRNA said, and was sent into space as a “data-processing satellite project” that began in March 2005 as “the first practical step toward acquiring national space technology.”
“The project’s experts focused on manufacturing the equipment and helping develop the potential of domestic companies to carry out such projects,” the IRNA report said.
David Albright, the president of the Institute for Science and International Security, a private group in Washington that tracks nuclear proliferation, said he felt the technology used by Iran to launch the satellite remained rudimentary by international standards.
“It’s not a very capable missile. The payload and diameter aren’t that great,” he said. “It doesn’t say much, if anything, about their ability to deliver a nuclear weapon. But part of the concern here is that Iran is continuing its steady drip-drip-drip toward a nuclear weapons capability.”
Aerospace experts said that while Tehran was still not capable of launching an intercontinental ballistic missile, the satellite still took many years of preparation and required the mastery of staging — the art of creating a multistage rocket that drops stages (and thus weight) as it races ever higher.
Last August, Iran test-fired a new rocket capable of carrying a satellite into orbit. Western experts said at the time that the launching represented a potentially significant, if much-delayed, step in Iran’s efforts to join the international space club. And in 2005, Tehran launched a Russian-made satellite with a Russian-made rocket.
“They’ve been at this game for about five years, working on a rocket big enough to put a satellite into space,” said Charles P. Vick, an expert on Iranian rockets at GlobalSecurity.org, a private research group in Alexandria, Va.
He added that the Iranian rocket had two stages. If carrying a warhead, he said, the Iranian missile could fire the weapon about 1,550 miles.
For Iran to achieve the technical step of launching an intercontinental ballistic missile, Mr. Vick said, it would have to develop a more powerful basic rocket or more upper stages — goals it is pursuing.
Since Mr. Obama’s inauguration, outside powers have been looking for clues as to whether Tehran is prepared to make new concessions in the dispute over Iran’s alleged efforts to develop nuclear weapons. They have also been waiting to see how the new American president will pursue his overtures of dialogue, which are designed to halt Iran’s uranium enrichment program.
Nations dealing with the Iran issue — the United States, Russia, Britain, China, France and Germany — will meet Wednesday in Frankfurt, Germany, for their first talks since Mr. Obama took office.
Iranian state television on Tuesday showed footage of a rocket blasting off from a firing platform in a huge blast of smoke flame as it clambered into the night sky.
“Dear Iranian nation, your children have placed the first indigenous satellite into orbit,” Reuters quoted President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as saying in a televised message.
“With God’s help and the desire for justice and peace, the official presence of the Islamic Republic was registered in space,” he said.
The Omid was designed to gather information and test equipment, according to Reuters, and will circle the earth 14 times a day. Iranian television news said the satellite would return to earth with data after orbiting for one to three months.
Davoud Hermidas Bavand, a political analyst and professor of international law at Tehran’s Allameh Tabatabai University, said that the launching of the satellite could elevate Iran’s status and lead to a change of tone toward Iran’s nuclear program.
“Their success shows that Iran has achieved major technological progress,” he said. “It is also a matter of prestige for Iran because it has joined the space club, which has very few members.”
Iran also announced Tuesday that it would test its new version of a radar-evading plane in the first half of the new Iranian year, which starts on March 21. The commander of the Iranian air force, Brigadier General Hassan Shah-Safi, said Tuesday that Iran had also increased the flight range of its fighters to over 1,200 miles, the IRNA news agency reported.
William J. Broad reported from New York, and Alan Cowell from London. Nazila Fathi contributed reporting from Tehran, and Sharon Otterman from New York.
Iran said it had also used a domestically produced rocket to launch the satellite. That would make it part of the exclusive club of states that can loft objects into orbit, which now numbers at least nine. Weapons experts say the same technology used to put satellites into orbit can also be used for launching weapons.
In Washington, State Department spokesman Robert Wood called the reports a matter of “great concern” and potentially in violation of United Nations agreements limiting Iran from missile activity.
“Developing a space launch vehicle that could be put a satellite into orbit could possibly lead to the development of a ballistic missile system,” he said.
The head of Israel’s Space Agency, Zvi Kaplan, said initial reports showed that a satellite had been launched.
“From what I have been investigating it is true,” he said, according to The Associated Press. “We are not surprised because in this day and age of information and technology and with Iranian scientists studying abroad they can obtain the knowledge.”
The official Iranian news agency, IRNA, said the satellite was launched using a Safir-2 rocket and was “successfully sent into orbit.”
The satellite, which weighed about 60 pounds, is named Omid, or Hope, IRNA said, and was sent into space as a “data-processing satellite project” that began in March 2005 as “the first practical step toward acquiring national space technology.”
“The project’s experts focused on manufacturing the equipment and helping develop the potential of domestic companies to carry out such projects,” the IRNA report said.
David Albright, the president of the Institute for Science and International Security, a private group in Washington that tracks nuclear proliferation, said he felt the technology used by Iran to launch the satellite remained rudimentary by international standards.
“It’s not a very capable missile. The payload and diameter aren’t that great,” he said. “It doesn’t say much, if anything, about their ability to deliver a nuclear weapon. But part of the concern here is that Iran is continuing its steady drip-drip-drip toward a nuclear weapons capability.”
Aerospace experts said that while Tehran was still not capable of launching an intercontinental ballistic missile, the satellite still took many years of preparation and required the mastery of staging — the art of creating a multistage rocket that drops stages (and thus weight) as it races ever higher.
Last August, Iran test-fired a new rocket capable of carrying a satellite into orbit. Western experts said at the time that the launching represented a potentially significant, if much-delayed, step in Iran’s efforts to join the international space club. And in 2005, Tehran launched a Russian-made satellite with a Russian-made rocket.
“They’ve been at this game for about five years, working on a rocket big enough to put a satellite into space,” said Charles P. Vick, an expert on Iranian rockets at GlobalSecurity.org, a private research group in Alexandria, Va.
He added that the Iranian rocket had two stages. If carrying a warhead, he said, the Iranian missile could fire the weapon about 1,550 miles.
For Iran to achieve the technical step of launching an intercontinental ballistic missile, Mr. Vick said, it would have to develop a more powerful basic rocket or more upper stages — goals it is pursuing.
Since Mr. Obama’s inauguration, outside powers have been looking for clues as to whether Tehran is prepared to make new concessions in the dispute over Iran’s alleged efforts to develop nuclear weapons. They have also been waiting to see how the new American president will pursue his overtures of dialogue, which are designed to halt Iran’s uranium enrichment program.
Nations dealing with the Iran issue — the United States, Russia, Britain, China, France and Germany — will meet Wednesday in Frankfurt, Germany, for their first talks since Mr. Obama took office.
Iranian state television on Tuesday showed footage of a rocket blasting off from a firing platform in a huge blast of smoke flame as it clambered into the night sky.
“Dear Iranian nation, your children have placed the first indigenous satellite into orbit,” Reuters quoted President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as saying in a televised message.
“With God’s help and the desire for justice and peace, the official presence of the Islamic Republic was registered in space,” he said.
The Omid was designed to gather information and test equipment, according to Reuters, and will circle the earth 14 times a day. Iranian television news said the satellite would return to earth with data after orbiting for one to three months.
Davoud Hermidas Bavand, a political analyst and professor of international law at Tehran’s Allameh Tabatabai University, said that the launching of the satellite could elevate Iran’s status and lead to a change of tone toward Iran’s nuclear program.
“Their success shows that Iran has achieved major technological progress,” he said. “It is also a matter of prestige for Iran because it has joined the space club, which has very few members.”
Iran also announced Tuesday that it would test its new version of a radar-evading plane in the first half of the new Iranian year, which starts on March 21. The commander of the Iranian air force, Brigadier General Hassan Shah-Safi, said Tuesday that Iran had also increased the flight range of its fighters to over 1,200 miles, the IRNA news agency reported.
William J. Broad reported from New York, and Alan Cowell from London. Nazila Fathi contributed reporting from Tehran, and Sharon Otterman from New York.
The New York Times
Iran satellite launch is symbolic step: U.S. official
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Iran's launch of its first satellite added new fuel to U.S. concerns over its nuclear ambitions, but a security official said on Tuesday the move did not by itself alter the strategic balance.
Iran announced the launch a day before world powers discuss strategy over Iran -- one of the top U.S. foreign policy issues in the early days of President Barack Obama's administration.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the United States would show openness to Iran -- a change from a hard-line isolation policy under former President George W. Bush -- but urged it to respond in kind.
"We are reaching out a hand, but the fist has to unclench," Clinton said at a news briefing with Britain's Foreign Secretary David Miliband.
Clinton said senior U.S. diplomat Bill Burns would join officials from other major powers in Germany on Wednesday to discuss an international strategy for curbing Iran's nuclear ambitions.
Iran said it had launched into orbit for the first time a domestically made Omid (Hope) research and telecommunications satellite. The launch was timed to coincide with the 30th anniversary of the 1979 Islamic revolution that ousted the U.S.-backed Shah.
Iran's satellite technology may also be used in the development of ballistic missiles, the U.S. Defense Department said. Such missiles could be used to deliver a nuclear weapon over large distances.
The United States suspects Iran of developing nuclear weapons, although Iran has long said its nuclear program is purely for civilian energy purposes.
"This development today is cause for concern not just here in the United States but in Europe, throughout the Middle East and I believe throughout the greater world," Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell told reporters. "They (Iran) pose a real threat and it is a growing threat."
State Department spokesman Robert Wood described U.S. concern as "grave." Britain also expressed concern over the launch.
A U.S. national security official said, however, the satellite technology deployed in the launch "is probably not state-of-the-art."
"But for the Iranians this is an important symbolic step forward," the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.
It is unclear what Iran intends to use the satellite for, and the United States is still trying to learn more about it, the official said.
But asked if the launch could have a strategic or tactical impact on the region, he said, "this particular satellite launch does not appear to be a game changer at all."
He said the satellite was in a low orbit and noted that some satellites last only a short time aloft. "This one may fit into that category," he said.
Iran announced the launch a day before world powers discuss strategy over Iran -- one of the top U.S. foreign policy issues in the early days of President Barack Obama's administration.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the United States would show openness to Iran -- a change from a hard-line isolation policy under former President George W. Bush -- but urged it to respond in kind.
"We are reaching out a hand, but the fist has to unclench," Clinton said at a news briefing with Britain's Foreign Secretary David Miliband.
Clinton said senior U.S. diplomat Bill Burns would join officials from other major powers in Germany on Wednesday to discuss an international strategy for curbing Iran's nuclear ambitions.
Iran said it had launched into orbit for the first time a domestically made Omid (Hope) research and telecommunications satellite. The launch was timed to coincide with the 30th anniversary of the 1979 Islamic revolution that ousted the U.S.-backed Shah.
Iran's satellite technology may also be used in the development of ballistic missiles, the U.S. Defense Department said. Such missiles could be used to deliver a nuclear weapon over large distances.
The United States suspects Iran of developing nuclear weapons, although Iran has long said its nuclear program is purely for civilian energy purposes.
"This development today is cause for concern not just here in the United States but in Europe, throughout the Middle East and I believe throughout the greater world," Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell told reporters. "They (Iran) pose a real threat and it is a growing threat."
State Department spokesman Robert Wood described U.S. concern as "grave." Britain also expressed concern over the launch.
A U.S. national security official said, however, the satellite technology deployed in the launch "is probably not state-of-the-art."
"But for the Iranians this is an important symbolic step forward," the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.
It is unclear what Iran intends to use the satellite for, and the United States is still trying to learn more about it, the official said.
But asked if the launch could have a strategic or tactical impact on the region, he said, "this particular satellite launch does not appear to be a game changer at all."
He said the satellite was in a low orbit and noted that some satellites last only a short time aloft. "This one may fit into that category," he said.
Reuters
Monday, February 2, 2009
Iran defiant on nuclear programme ahead of key meeting
TEHRAN — Iran remained defiant over its nuclear programme on Monday as representatives of six major powers prepare to meet in Germany this week to look at ways of persuading it to curb its atomic ambitions.
The unyielding comments from parliament speaker Ali Larijani, a former lead negotiatior on the nuclear issue, came despite overtures from the new US administration of President Barack Obama, who has offered Iran an extended hand of diplomacy if its leaders "unclenched their fist."
"If they (the United States and the international community) want Iran to give up the know-how it has regarding the nuclear programme, they are talking nonsense," Larijani told a news conference.
"This kind of talk has no legal basis and it is against the will of the Iranian public," he said, adding that it was the international community which has to "give up their preconditions" if they want to hold talks with Iran.
In a break with the policy of president George W. Bush, Obama has offered to open a dialogue with Iran without preconditions, something that was strongly welcomed by UN atomic watchdog chief Mohamed ElBaradei in an interview published on Sunday.
"You're not going to have trust unless you have a direct dialogue," ElBaradei told the Washington Post.
"President Obama is saying he's ready to have a direct dialogue without preconditions, based on mutual respect. I say this is absolutely overdue."
But when asked about the change of tack by the Obama administration, Larijani insisted: "We still have not seen any new approach.
"There is still some talk about big sticks and big carrots (regarding Iran's nuclear programme)," he told reporters.
Larijani took particular issue with a recent White House statement making clear that Obama had not ruled out the option of a military strike against Iran.
"Putting the military option on the table was wrong from the start," he said.
"I think Obama made a mistake by saying it. We are not deterred by these things."
Wednesday's meeting of the six major powers in Frankfurt will be the first since Obama took office on January 20.
The six -- Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States -- have been at loggerheads with Iran over its nuclear work, which Washington and other Western powers suspect of being a cover for a drive to produce the bomb.
The UN Security Council has already adopted four resolutions requiring Iran to suspend its uranium enrichment programme, three of which imposed sanctions.
Iran insists its nuclear programme is for civil energy uses only.
In December, ElBaradei, said international efforts to halt Iranian nuclear activity had been a failure.
The IAEA reported in November that Iran had more than 5,000 uranium enrichment centrifuges in operation.
Larijani confirmed he will attend an international security conference in Munich later this week but ruled out any possibility of talking with US delegates, who are to include Vice President Joe Biden.
The February 6-8 conference is to focus on disarmament, world energy supplies and regional security issues, and Larijani said: "My contribution at the conference will be limited to these topics."
However, former parliament speaker Mehdi Karroubi, a leading reformist who plans to stand in Iran's presidential election in June, said he was in favour of dialogue with Washington.
"The taboo of negotiations with the United States has been broken with the letter of congratulations," the semi-official ILNA news agency quoted him as saying in reference to a surprise letter sent by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to Obama after his election victory in November.
"Therefore it is possible to talk with the United States within the framework of foreign policy defined by the supreme leader (Ayatollah Ali Khamenei)," Karroubi said.
The unyielding comments from parliament speaker Ali Larijani, a former lead negotiatior on the nuclear issue, came despite overtures from the new US administration of President Barack Obama, who has offered Iran an extended hand of diplomacy if its leaders "unclenched their fist."
"If they (the United States and the international community) want Iran to give up the know-how it has regarding the nuclear programme, they are talking nonsense," Larijani told a news conference.
"This kind of talk has no legal basis and it is against the will of the Iranian public," he said, adding that it was the international community which has to "give up their preconditions" if they want to hold talks with Iran.
In a break with the policy of president George W. Bush, Obama has offered to open a dialogue with Iran without preconditions, something that was strongly welcomed by UN atomic watchdog chief Mohamed ElBaradei in an interview published on Sunday.
"You're not going to have trust unless you have a direct dialogue," ElBaradei told the Washington Post.
"President Obama is saying he's ready to have a direct dialogue without preconditions, based on mutual respect. I say this is absolutely overdue."
But when asked about the change of tack by the Obama administration, Larijani insisted: "We still have not seen any new approach.
"There is still some talk about big sticks and big carrots (regarding Iran's nuclear programme)," he told reporters.
Larijani took particular issue with a recent White House statement making clear that Obama had not ruled out the option of a military strike against Iran.
"Putting the military option on the table was wrong from the start," he said.
"I think Obama made a mistake by saying it. We are not deterred by these things."
Wednesday's meeting of the six major powers in Frankfurt will be the first since Obama took office on January 20.
The six -- Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States -- have been at loggerheads with Iran over its nuclear work, which Washington and other Western powers suspect of being a cover for a drive to produce the bomb.
The UN Security Council has already adopted four resolutions requiring Iran to suspend its uranium enrichment programme, three of which imposed sanctions.
Iran insists its nuclear programme is for civil energy uses only.
In December, ElBaradei, said international efforts to halt Iranian nuclear activity had been a failure.
The IAEA reported in November that Iran had more than 5,000 uranium enrichment centrifuges in operation.
Larijani confirmed he will attend an international security conference in Munich later this week but ruled out any possibility of talking with US delegates, who are to include Vice President Joe Biden.
The February 6-8 conference is to focus on disarmament, world energy supplies and regional security issues, and Larijani said: "My contribution at the conference will be limited to these topics."
However, former parliament speaker Mehdi Karroubi, a leading reformist who plans to stand in Iran's presidential election in June, said he was in favour of dialogue with Washington.
"The taboo of negotiations with the United States has been broken with the letter of congratulations," the semi-official ILNA news agency quoted him as saying in reference to a surprise letter sent by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to Obama after his election victory in November.
"Therefore it is possible to talk with the United States within the framework of foreign policy defined by the supreme leader (Ayatollah Ali Khamenei)," Karroubi said.
AFP
US targets Chinese, Iranian, NKorean firms
WASHINGTON - The Obama administration is imposing sanctions on several Chinese, Iranian and North Korean companies for violating arms export regulations governing missile technology and other proliferation activities.
The penalties announced by the State Department in Monday's Federal Register are the first of their kind from the new administration and affect four firms in China, three in North Korea and two in Iran.
The sanctions are largely symbolic as they bar the companies from trade with the U.S. that they were not likely involved in. Although the sanctions were in the works for some time, the Obama team signed off on them on Jan. 21, a day after Barack Obama took office. They signal a continuing tough stance from Washington on weapons technology transfers.
The penalties announced by the State Department in Monday's Federal Register are the first of their kind from the new administration and affect four firms in China, three in North Korea and two in Iran.
The sanctions are largely symbolic as they bar the companies from trade with the U.S. that they were not likely involved in. Although the sanctions were in the works for some time, the Obama team signed off on them on Jan. 21, a day after Barack Obama took office. They signal a continuing tough stance from Washington on weapons technology transfers.
Ap
Qatar's mood swings: Pro-Iran or pro-West?
During back-to-back summits in recent days, tiny Qatar displayed some big mood swings.
First the Persian Gulf emirate hosted a Gaza crisis conference that included Iran's president and Hamas' leader and became a soapbox to bash America and its Mideast allies. Then three days later in Kuwait, Qatari leaders had lunch with Saudi King Abdullah and gushed about unity with Washington's top Arab partners.
President Barack Obama has inherited the familiar map of Arab-Israeli minefields. But off to the side _ sticking like an exclamation point into the Gulf _ Qatar could quickly become a quandary for the new White House.
"It looks a bit like a cold war in the Middle East now. There's the side firmly with the United States and (Palestinian President Mahmoud) Abbas, and the others backing Hamas and, by extension, seen as moving toward Iran," said Nadim Shehadi, a Mideast affairs specialist at the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London.
"And, like with a cold war, no side is willing to push it too hard because the risks are so great," he added.
Nearly every high-stakes question in the Middle East these days somehow draws in Qatar, which is the just half the size of Belgium but strives for a place alongside Arab heavyweights such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia.
It is rich in oil and gas reserves, has wide influence in the Muslim world as the patron of the Al-Jazeera TV network, and has proved adroit at maneuvering between rivals.
"You sometimes get the feeling that Qatar has multiple personalities," said Mustafa Alani, director of national security and terrorism studies at the Gulf Research Center in Dubai. "It's hard to say which one will show up."
Qatar once was content to leave the region's high-profile affairs to others. Then in 1995, a family coup brought the current emir, Sheik Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, to power and he quickly began to carve out a new international identity for Qatar. Those ambitions have grown steadily bolder.
Qatar bid credibly though unsuccessfully for the 2016 Olympics. Last year, it brokered a complicated political accord for Lebanon, and it has offered to mediate talks to end the bloodshed in Sudan's Darfur region.
In the 1990s, it defied Arab hard-liners and allowed an Israeli trade office to open in the seaside capital, Doha. Last year, Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni attended a Doha conference on Mideast peace.
It has long had cozy relations with Washington, hosts one of the largest U.S. air bases in the region, and allowed the Pentagon set up coordination hubs for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
But now, Qatar appears to be steadying itself for even larger_ and potentially riskier _ gambits with Iran, Hamas and other Western foes.
The Gaza aid conference called by Qatar brought the potential pitfalls with the West into sharp relief.
Key U.S. allies Egypt and Saudi Arabia boycotted the gathering in solidarity with Palestinian leader Abbas. He has accused Qatar of funneling huge amounts of money to rival Hamas, which Washington and the European Union consider a terrorist group.
Hamas' Syria-based political chief, Khaled Mashaal, attended the meeting along with Syrian President Bashar Assad. The summit closed with a parting shot from Qatar: expelling the Israeli trade mission that represented one of the rare examples of tangible Arab-Israeli progress.
But the presence of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at the gathering signaled perhaps an even deeper policy reassessment by Qatar. The United States and its main Arab allies are worried about Iranian efforts to shift the regional balance of power. Tehran makes no secret of its desire to expand its influence in the Gulf and elsewhere through proxy groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah in Lebanon.
Qatar could be looking ahead for safer ground if the West's showdowns with Iran grow dicier. Qatar's apparent direction for the moment: trying to carve a path away from Saudi Arabia as its big brother while paying homage to Iran's growing clout and confidence.
But Qatar is still apparently interested in hedging its political bets. It may prove that Qatar is most comfortable being on the fence, some experts say.
"It does not have to be one or the other," said Mehran Kamrawa, a professor of political science at Georgetown University's Qatar campus. "What they are doing is playing all sides ... to maximize self interest, ensure a global and regional role and follow the logic of survival."
This approach appeared on display at the Kuwait meeting several days after Ahmadinejad left Doha. Qatar's prime minister, Sheik Hamad bin Jassem Al Thani, a member of the ruling family, called for "Arab reconciliation" and remained silent as Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak lashed out at Arab leaders who have built ties with Iran.
Obama also has indicated that Washington could be willing to hold direct talks with Iran, and if a thaw sets in after a 30-year diplomatic freeze, Qatar could find itself very comfortable holding the middle ground.
"Qatar feels it has a role to play," said David Butter, Middle East regional director at the London-based Economist Intelligence Unit. "I am not sure what the end game is and I am not sure Qatar knows it either."
First the Persian Gulf emirate hosted a Gaza crisis conference that included Iran's president and Hamas' leader and became a soapbox to bash America and its Mideast allies. Then three days later in Kuwait, Qatari leaders had lunch with Saudi King Abdullah and gushed about unity with Washington's top Arab partners.
President Barack Obama has inherited the familiar map of Arab-Israeli minefields. But off to the side _ sticking like an exclamation point into the Gulf _ Qatar could quickly become a quandary for the new White House.
"It looks a bit like a cold war in the Middle East now. There's the side firmly with the United States and (Palestinian President Mahmoud) Abbas, and the others backing Hamas and, by extension, seen as moving toward Iran," said Nadim Shehadi, a Mideast affairs specialist at the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London.
"And, like with a cold war, no side is willing to push it too hard because the risks are so great," he added.
Nearly every high-stakes question in the Middle East these days somehow draws in Qatar, which is the just half the size of Belgium but strives for a place alongside Arab heavyweights such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia.
It is rich in oil and gas reserves, has wide influence in the Muslim world as the patron of the Al-Jazeera TV network, and has proved adroit at maneuvering between rivals.
"You sometimes get the feeling that Qatar has multiple personalities," said Mustafa Alani, director of national security and terrorism studies at the Gulf Research Center in Dubai. "It's hard to say which one will show up."
Qatar once was content to leave the region's high-profile affairs to others. Then in 1995, a family coup brought the current emir, Sheik Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, to power and he quickly began to carve out a new international identity for Qatar. Those ambitions have grown steadily bolder.
Qatar bid credibly though unsuccessfully for the 2016 Olympics. Last year, it brokered a complicated political accord for Lebanon, and it has offered to mediate talks to end the bloodshed in Sudan's Darfur region.
In the 1990s, it defied Arab hard-liners and allowed an Israeli trade office to open in the seaside capital, Doha. Last year, Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni attended a Doha conference on Mideast peace.
It has long had cozy relations with Washington, hosts one of the largest U.S. air bases in the region, and allowed the Pentagon set up coordination hubs for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
But now, Qatar appears to be steadying itself for even larger_ and potentially riskier _ gambits with Iran, Hamas and other Western foes.
The Gaza aid conference called by Qatar brought the potential pitfalls with the West into sharp relief.
Key U.S. allies Egypt and Saudi Arabia boycotted the gathering in solidarity with Palestinian leader Abbas. He has accused Qatar of funneling huge amounts of money to rival Hamas, which Washington and the European Union consider a terrorist group.
Hamas' Syria-based political chief, Khaled Mashaal, attended the meeting along with Syrian President Bashar Assad. The summit closed with a parting shot from Qatar: expelling the Israeli trade mission that represented one of the rare examples of tangible Arab-Israeli progress.
But the presence of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at the gathering signaled perhaps an even deeper policy reassessment by Qatar. The United States and its main Arab allies are worried about Iranian efforts to shift the regional balance of power. Tehran makes no secret of its desire to expand its influence in the Gulf and elsewhere through proxy groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah in Lebanon.
Qatar could be looking ahead for safer ground if the West's showdowns with Iran grow dicier. Qatar's apparent direction for the moment: trying to carve a path away from Saudi Arabia as its big brother while paying homage to Iran's growing clout and confidence.
But Qatar is still apparently interested in hedging its political bets. It may prove that Qatar is most comfortable being on the fence, some experts say.
"It does not have to be one or the other," said Mehran Kamrawa, a professor of political science at Georgetown University's Qatar campus. "What they are doing is playing all sides ... to maximize self interest, ensure a global and regional role and follow the logic of survival."
This approach appeared on display at the Kuwait meeting several days after Ahmadinejad left Doha. Qatar's prime minister, Sheik Hamad bin Jassem Al Thani, a member of the ruling family, called for "Arab reconciliation" and remained silent as Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak lashed out at Arab leaders who have built ties with Iran.
Obama also has indicated that Washington could be willing to hold direct talks with Iran, and if a thaw sets in after a 30-year diplomatic freeze, Qatar could find itself very comfortable holding the middle ground.
"Qatar feels it has a role to play," said David Butter, Middle East regional director at the London-based Economist Intelligence Unit. "I am not sure what the end game is and I am not sure Qatar knows it either."
Associated Press
THE JERUSALEM POST
Netanyahu says Iran will not get hands on nukes
JERUSALEM — Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel's leading candidate for prime minister, said Saturday that Iran "will not be armed with a nuclear weapon." In an interview with Israel's Channel 2 TV, Netanyahu said if elected prime minister his first mission will be to thwart the Iranian nuclear threat. Netanyahu, the current opposition leader and head of the hardline Likud party, called Iran the greatest danger to Israel and to all humanity. When asked if stopping Iran's nuclear ambitions included a military strike, he replied: "It includes everything that is necessary to make this statement come true."Iran has denied it is seeking to acquire nuclear weapons and says it is pursuing nuclear power for peaceful uses. It also denies it is engaged in terrorism, instead accusing Israel of terrorist policies against the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, which were occupied by Israel after the 1967 Mideast War.The Channel 2 TV broadcast interviewed all three candidates for prime minister ahead of the Feb. 10 election. The three did not debate each other and appeared one after the other to answer questions posted by Israelis in YouTube videos.Tzipi Livni of Kadima and Ehud Barak of Labor were both asked about how they intended to deal with the continuing rocket threat from Hamas militants in Gaza. Both took a hard line."Hamas was hit like it was never hit before," Barak, the defense minister, said. "If they try us again, they will be hit again."Israeli launched a massive three-week offensive against Gaza militants on Dec. 27 to stop eight years of near-daily militant rocket fire at southern Israeli towns. Nearly 1,300 Palestinians were killed in the fighting, about half of them civilians, according to the Palestinian Center for Human Rights. Thirteen Israelis were also killed, three of them civilians.Livni, the foreign minister, said if Hamas "hasn't gotten the message yet" Israel would strike it again.Regardless, she said Hamas could not be negotiated with and called on the people of Gaza to overthrow their regime."I do not intend to reach any agreements with Hamas. Agreements I make with people who accept my existence," she said. "They do not recognize Israel and do not renounce violence and terrorism. They will not be a party to an agreement and therefore the people of Gaza have to expel the Hamas from within them."
Ap
Talk to Iran. Then What?
THE presidential campaign failed to address the hard choices America must make to contain the Iranian nuclear threat. By focusing almost exclusively on tactics, the election obscured the questions that really matter: What should the United States demand when it finally talks to Iran? And when Iran rejects our opening position, how much should we compromise to come to a deal?
The opening act, after all, is entirely predictable. The Obama administration will likely begin negotiations by insisting that Iran suspend its efforts to enrich uranium. Compliance with this requirement - imposed by the United Nations Security Council in July 2006 and reiterated several times since - has been the goal of the European-led negotiations with Iran that President Obama faulted the Bush administration for not joining. Iran has consistently rejected the demands of the United Nations and our European allies, however, and it would be naïve to expect a different answer just because the United States is at the negotiating table. Iran will almost certainly say no, presumably calculating that it can eventually force the world to accept its enrichment program.
So what then? After a few unsuccessful meetings, experts both in and outside of government will increasingly express doubts about the American position. They will ask: Aren't we demanding too much? Perhaps it was reasonable to call for suspension in 2006 when Iran had 164 centrifuges spinning, but is it reasonable now that Iran claims to have more than 5,000 in operation, and more on the way? Some will argue that time is on Iran's side: As we negotiate, Iranians will continue to install more centrifuges. So shouldn't we cut the best deal we can now, even if it allows Iran to continue enriching?
The critics will propose fallback positions like allowing enrichment, but under enhanced international safeguards that supposedly can detect the development of nuclear weapons. Perhaps they will propose strict limits on the amount of uranium that Iran can enrich. Or, as suggested last year by the retired diplomat Thomas Pickering and his co-writers William Luers and Jim Walsh: allowing enrichment, but only on the condition that Iran converts its national enrichment efforts into a multinational program that is owned and operated by a consortium of countries.
The problem is that other countries in the region could demand the same treatment. Such is the lesson of the Bush administration's decision to abandon its opposition to Iran's construction of a nuclear power reactor at Bushehr. This eliminated the option of opposing civil nuclear power elsewhere in the Middle East. How could we explain to Saudi Arabia and Egypt, for example, that we trust Iran to have civil nuclear power reactors, but not them?
The same principle applies to enrichment. Once we accept enrichment in Iran, it will become impossible to deny the same arrangement to friendly governments in the region, let alone unfriendly ones like Syria. The result will be the proliferation of dangerous nuclear technologies that we have been seeking to avoid.
The risks will be even greater if we agree to convert Natanz into an international enrichment center. International partners will not invest in a primitive enrichment operation that relies on old and unproven technologies. They will insist on state of the art enrichment equipment, Western management and access to export markets - the absence of which has hindered Iran's enrichment progress up to now. By contrast, so long as Iran's nuclear enrichment program remains illegitimate and subject to international censure, it cannot serve as an attractive model for other countries.
For these reasons, the United States cannot be more eager than Tehran to reach a deal, and Mr. Obama must persuade Iran that he can afford to see negotiations fail. Of course, he will have to do so amid the high expectations that he has created by calling for direct, unconditional engagement with Tehran. This may turn out to be the new president's greatest diplomatic challenge.
By STEPHEN RADEMAKER
Published: February 1, 2009
The New York Times
The opening act, after all, is entirely predictable. The Obama administration will likely begin negotiations by insisting that Iran suspend its efforts to enrich uranium. Compliance with this requirement - imposed by the United Nations Security Council in July 2006 and reiterated several times since - has been the goal of the European-led negotiations with Iran that President Obama faulted the Bush administration for not joining. Iran has consistently rejected the demands of the United Nations and our European allies, however, and it would be naïve to expect a different answer just because the United States is at the negotiating table. Iran will almost certainly say no, presumably calculating that it can eventually force the world to accept its enrichment program.
So what then? After a few unsuccessful meetings, experts both in and outside of government will increasingly express doubts about the American position. They will ask: Aren't we demanding too much? Perhaps it was reasonable to call for suspension in 2006 when Iran had 164 centrifuges spinning, but is it reasonable now that Iran claims to have more than 5,000 in operation, and more on the way? Some will argue that time is on Iran's side: As we negotiate, Iranians will continue to install more centrifuges. So shouldn't we cut the best deal we can now, even if it allows Iran to continue enriching?
The critics will propose fallback positions like allowing enrichment, but under enhanced international safeguards that supposedly can detect the development of nuclear weapons. Perhaps they will propose strict limits on the amount of uranium that Iran can enrich. Or, as suggested last year by the retired diplomat Thomas Pickering and his co-writers William Luers and Jim Walsh: allowing enrichment, but only on the condition that Iran converts its national enrichment efforts into a multinational program that is owned and operated by a consortium of countries.
The problem is that other countries in the region could demand the same treatment. Such is the lesson of the Bush administration's decision to abandon its opposition to Iran's construction of a nuclear power reactor at Bushehr. This eliminated the option of opposing civil nuclear power elsewhere in the Middle East. How could we explain to Saudi Arabia and Egypt, for example, that we trust Iran to have civil nuclear power reactors, but not them?
The same principle applies to enrichment. Once we accept enrichment in Iran, it will become impossible to deny the same arrangement to friendly governments in the region, let alone unfriendly ones like Syria. The result will be the proliferation of dangerous nuclear technologies that we have been seeking to avoid.
The risks will be even greater if we agree to convert Natanz into an international enrichment center. International partners will not invest in a primitive enrichment operation that relies on old and unproven technologies. They will insist on state of the art enrichment equipment, Western management and access to export markets - the absence of which has hindered Iran's enrichment progress up to now. By contrast, so long as Iran's nuclear enrichment program remains illegitimate and subject to international censure, it cannot serve as an attractive model for other countries.
For these reasons, the United States cannot be more eager than Tehran to reach a deal, and Mr. Obama must persuade Iran that he can afford to see negotiations fail. Of course, he will have to do so amid the high expectations that he has created by calling for direct, unconditional engagement with Tehran. This may turn out to be the new president's greatest diplomatic challenge.
By STEPHEN RADEMAKER
Published: February 1, 2009
The New York Times
Roger Cohen: The other Iran
TEHRAN: At one of the large embassies offering islands of peace from the gridlocked, grinding Iranian capital, a Western diplomat said this of U.S. and allied policy toward Iran: "You could argue that our policy has not yet failed."
That would be the most charitable view. But it is failing. Where Iran had a handful of centrifuges enriching uranium four years ago, it now has at least 5,000. With its enemies in Iraq and Afghanistan removed by U.S. military force, it has extended its regional influence.
This city, whose real-estate boom has rivaled Manhattan's in recent years, is still awash in cash from the giddy oil price season. Those billions, even ebbing, equal confidence. The Iranian Revolution, now at its 30th anniversary, has recharged its batteries on a global wave of Bush-inspired, Gaza-cemented, anti-Western sentiment.
It's time to think again, not merely to re-calibrate old formulas, in order to end the three-decade impasse in U.S.-Iranian ties, a breakdown of huge cost and menace. A non-relationship has locked itself in stereotypes, the fruit of estrangement, as U.S. threats ("the military option must be kept on the table") and demands (stop the centrifuges) meet a wall of Iranian pride.
One place to begin that reflection might be in the southern stretches of Tehran, where I was the other day on the anniversary of Ayatollah Khomeini's triumphant return from France. I'd been at an airport ceremony, featuring a rousing orchestra and a kitschy reproduction of the Air France jumbo jet that brought him home, and now found myself surrounded by graves near the Khomeini shrine.These graves, often adorned with wrenching photographs of 16-year-olds, stretch away, hundreds of thousands of them, mostly victims - or martyrs as they are called here - of the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war. Their deaths followed the 1978-79 revolutionary violence. Iran bled for a decade.
The psychological impact of this trauma is still palpable. Iranians don't want to bleed again; they want to get ahead. In this, they resemble the post-Cultural Revolution Chinese.
Pragmatism reigns for all the inflammatory official rhetoric. Money, education and opportunity drive people. Years of mayhem in neighboring Iraq and Afghanistan have concentrated Iranian minds: Who needs that?
"Overthrowing regimes is no longer on the agenda," Mohammad Atrianfar, the former editor of a reformist magazine shut down by the government, told me. "Reform, yes, upheaval, no."
Young people - and well over half the population is under 30 - may want a freer press or freer dress. But cell phones, widespread Internet access and satellite TV (government restrictions are as easily circumvented as Western sanctions) sap confrontational adrenalin. The Islamic revolution has proved resilient in part because of its flexibility.
In a land of such competing currents, the United States has focused on one: Iran as an expansionist power. Iran's political constellation includes those who have given past support to terrorist organizations. But an American myopia has led policy makers to underestimate the social, psychological and political forces for pragmatism, compromise and stability. Iran has not waged a war of aggression for a very long time.
Tehran shares many American interests. It favors a democratic Iraq because that will be a Shiite-governed Iraq, and a unified Iraq stable enough for pilgrims to flock to the holy cities of Najaf and Karbala. It opposes Taliban redux in Afghanistan and Al Qaeda's Sunni fanaticism. Its democracy is flawed but by Middle Eastern standards vibrant. Both words in its self-description - Islamic Republic - count.
These common interests and the long misreading of Iranian priorities demand an entirely new approach from President Obama. The radical Bush presidency produced a radical Iranian response. Any Western visitor here is soon reminded that while modern Iraq was sketched on a 20th-century map, Persia has been around for millennia. Its pride requires treatment as an equal.
To suggest, as a recent report from the Bipartisan Policy Center in Washington did, that Obama must "begin augmenting the military lever" to complement intensified diplomacy is to recommend digging deeper into failure.
Blinking is never pleasant but can be shrewd. America and its allies should drop their insistence that enrichment at Natanz cease before talks begin (Iran could always restart enrichment anyway). Obama should also say that any military threat has moved under the table in the name of restoring dialogue. These two steps would place the onus on the Iranian regime.
Can revolutionary Iran live without "Death to America?" Powerful hard-line Iranian factions think not, but I'm with the majority of Iranians who believe their Islamic Republic can coexist with a functioning U.S. relationship.
That would be the most charitable view. But it is failing. Where Iran had a handful of centrifuges enriching uranium four years ago, it now has at least 5,000. With its enemies in Iraq and Afghanistan removed by U.S. military force, it has extended its regional influence.
This city, whose real-estate boom has rivaled Manhattan's in recent years, is still awash in cash from the giddy oil price season. Those billions, even ebbing, equal confidence. The Iranian Revolution, now at its 30th anniversary, has recharged its batteries on a global wave of Bush-inspired, Gaza-cemented, anti-Western sentiment.
It's time to think again, not merely to re-calibrate old formulas, in order to end the three-decade impasse in U.S.-Iranian ties, a breakdown of huge cost and menace. A non-relationship has locked itself in stereotypes, the fruit of estrangement, as U.S. threats ("the military option must be kept on the table") and demands (stop the centrifuges) meet a wall of Iranian pride.
One place to begin that reflection might be in the southern stretches of Tehran, where I was the other day on the anniversary of Ayatollah Khomeini's triumphant return from France. I'd been at an airport ceremony, featuring a rousing orchestra and a kitschy reproduction of the Air France jumbo jet that brought him home, and now found myself surrounded by graves near the Khomeini shrine.These graves, often adorned with wrenching photographs of 16-year-olds, stretch away, hundreds of thousands of them, mostly victims - or martyrs as they are called here - of the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war. Their deaths followed the 1978-79 revolutionary violence. Iran bled for a decade.
The psychological impact of this trauma is still palpable. Iranians don't want to bleed again; they want to get ahead. In this, they resemble the post-Cultural Revolution Chinese.
Pragmatism reigns for all the inflammatory official rhetoric. Money, education and opportunity drive people. Years of mayhem in neighboring Iraq and Afghanistan have concentrated Iranian minds: Who needs that?
"Overthrowing regimes is no longer on the agenda," Mohammad Atrianfar, the former editor of a reformist magazine shut down by the government, told me. "Reform, yes, upheaval, no."
Young people - and well over half the population is under 30 - may want a freer press or freer dress. But cell phones, widespread Internet access and satellite TV (government restrictions are as easily circumvented as Western sanctions) sap confrontational adrenalin. The Islamic revolution has proved resilient in part because of its flexibility.
In a land of such competing currents, the United States has focused on one: Iran as an expansionist power. Iran's political constellation includes those who have given past support to terrorist organizations. But an American myopia has led policy makers to underestimate the social, psychological and political forces for pragmatism, compromise and stability. Iran has not waged a war of aggression for a very long time.
Tehran shares many American interests. It favors a democratic Iraq because that will be a Shiite-governed Iraq, and a unified Iraq stable enough for pilgrims to flock to the holy cities of Najaf and Karbala. It opposes Taliban redux in Afghanistan and Al Qaeda's Sunni fanaticism. Its democracy is flawed but by Middle Eastern standards vibrant. Both words in its self-description - Islamic Republic - count.
These common interests and the long misreading of Iranian priorities demand an entirely new approach from President Obama. The radical Bush presidency produced a radical Iranian response. Any Western visitor here is soon reminded that while modern Iraq was sketched on a 20th-century map, Persia has been around for millennia. Its pride requires treatment as an equal.
To suggest, as a recent report from the Bipartisan Policy Center in Washington did, that Obama must "begin augmenting the military lever" to complement intensified diplomacy is to recommend digging deeper into failure.
Blinking is never pleasant but can be shrewd. America and its allies should drop their insistence that enrichment at Natanz cease before talks begin (Iran could always restart enrichment anyway). Obama should also say that any military threat has moved under the table in the name of restoring dialogue. These two steps would place the onus on the Iranian regime.
Can revolutionary Iran live without "Death to America?" Powerful hard-line Iranian factions think not, but I'm with the majority of Iranians who believe their Islamic Republic can coexist with a functioning U.S. relationship.
Obama should do five other things. Address his opening to the supreme religious leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, because he decides. State that America is not in the Iranian regime-change business. Act soon rather than wait for the Iranian presidential elections in June: Khamenei will still be around after them. Begin with small steps that build trust. Treat the nuclear issue within the whole range of U.S.-Iranian relations, rather than as its distorting focus.
Herald Tribune
No thaw with US as Iran marks anniversary of 1979 revolution
Iran yesterday rejected the idea of improved relations with the US unless there is a sharp change of policy from President Barack Obama, as the country began celebrating the 30th anniversary of the Islamic revolution.
The intelligence minister, Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Ejeie, denied a report that there had been secret contacts between Tehran and Washington about the contentious nuclear issue. "There have been no official negotiations with the Americans," he said, referring to a report from the US Pugwash Conferences, a non-governmental organisation, claiming that Obama advisers and Iranian officials had met in Europe several times.
Iran also denied that its foreign minister, Manuchehr Mottaki, would meet US officials at a conference in Munich which the US vice-president, Joe Biden, will be attending. Expectations are mounting for a positive response from Tehran to Obama's dramatic call for Iran to "unclench" its fist, amid reports that the new administration is considering further gestures.
But the 1979 anniversary celebrations are striking an inevitably militant tone, which makes it hard to sound "soft" on the traditional enemy of the revolution.
On Saturday morning bells and sirens marked the moment on 1 February 1979 when Ayatollah Khomeini landed back in Tehran after 14 years in exile. Ten days later, the shah's rule effectively collapsed. The anniversary was early because this is a leap year in the Iranian calendar.
Helicopters dropped flowers along the route from the airport to the Behesht-e-Zahra cemetery in south Tehran where Khomeini made his first speech. The president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, promised "to renew allegiance to the late imam's aspirations". He called the revolution a "new chapter in the life of world communities". Ten days of events are due to end with a mass rally on 10 February.
The US cut diplomatic ties with Tehran soon after the revolution. Relations soured further when student militants held 52 diplomats hostage for 444 days.
Prospects for a new start with the US are a big issue before Iran's presidential elections in June, amid signs that Ahmadinejad, under fire for economic mismanagement at home and adventurism abroad, will be challenged by the reformist former president Mohammad Khatami.
Older Iranians remember that the shah was restored to power in 1953 after the US overthrew the democratically-elected government in order to re-establish British control over Iranian oil.
The intelligence minister, Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Ejeie, denied a report that there had been secret contacts between Tehran and Washington about the contentious nuclear issue. "There have been no official negotiations with the Americans," he said, referring to a report from the US Pugwash Conferences, a non-governmental organisation, claiming that Obama advisers and Iranian officials had met in Europe several times.
Iran also denied that its foreign minister, Manuchehr Mottaki, would meet US officials at a conference in Munich which the US vice-president, Joe Biden, will be attending. Expectations are mounting for a positive response from Tehran to Obama's dramatic call for Iran to "unclench" its fist, amid reports that the new administration is considering further gestures.
But the 1979 anniversary celebrations are striking an inevitably militant tone, which makes it hard to sound "soft" on the traditional enemy of the revolution.
On Saturday morning bells and sirens marked the moment on 1 February 1979 when Ayatollah Khomeini landed back in Tehran after 14 years in exile. Ten days later, the shah's rule effectively collapsed. The anniversary was early because this is a leap year in the Iranian calendar.
Helicopters dropped flowers along the route from the airport to the Behesht-e-Zahra cemetery in south Tehran where Khomeini made his first speech. The president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, promised "to renew allegiance to the late imam's aspirations". He called the revolution a "new chapter in the life of world communities". Ten days of events are due to end with a mass rally on 10 February.
The US cut diplomatic ties with Tehran soon after the revolution. Relations soured further when student militants held 52 diplomats hostage for 444 days.
Prospects for a new start with the US are a big issue before Iran's presidential elections in June, amid signs that Ahmadinejad, under fire for economic mismanagement at home and adventurism abroad, will be challenged by the reformist former president Mohammad Khatami.
Older Iranians remember that the shah was restored to power in 1953 after the US overthrew the democratically-elected government in order to re-establish British control over Iranian oil.
Guardian
Middle East and North Africa: Sign Treaty Banning Cluster Weapons
Lebanon and Tunisia Are Only Nations in Region to Sign
(Beirut) - Governments of the Middle East and North Africa region should sign the new international treaty banning cluster munitions, Human Rights Watch said today. So far, Lebanon and Tunisia are the only two countries from the region to have signed the Convention on Cluster Munitions, which was opened for signature in December 2008. Lebanon signed the treaty in December 2008, and Tunisia signed on January 12, 2009.
The deadly weapon, which leaves behind sub-munitions that can kill for years, has been used in the region - in particular in Lebanon, Iraq, Kuwait, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Western Sahara. Human Rights Watch, with a coalition of other groups, campaigned for an international treaty to deal with cluster munitions after Israel's massive use of these weapons in southern Lebanon in July-August 2006. These weapons left large swaths of Lebanon contaminated by the deadly unexploded sub-munitions, which since the end of fighting have killed or wounded 218 civilians as well as 47 people who were trying to locate and remove them.
"Lebanon and Tunisia have recognized how important it is to free the world of these deadly weapons," said Sarah Leah Whitson, director of the Middle East and North Africa division of Human Rights Watch. "No Arab state has used cluster bombs in the past 15 years, and they now should promise never to do so in the future and join this treaty."
A total of 94 countries, including Lebanon, signed the Convention on Cluster Munitions in Oslo, Norway on December 3-4, 2008. The treaty is now open for signature at the United Nations in New York. Thirteen states from the region participated in meetings that led to the creation of the convention, but have not yet signed: Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Libya, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and Yemen. Iran, Israel, and Syria refused to participate in the process that created the convention, and also have refused to sign the agreement.
"The more Arab states sign, the greater the stigma associated with using this weapon in the region and the harder it will be for Israel or any other state to use this weapon," Whitson said.
The Convention on Cluster Munitions is a major advance in the protection of civilians both during and after armed conflict. It prohibits the use, production, transfer, and stockpiling of cluster munitions. The convention also requires the clearance of affected areas within 10 years and destruction of stockpiled cluster munitions within eight years, and includes assistance provisions to help affected nations with clearance and victim assistance. The new treaty also includes a groundbreaking provision requiring states that join it to take an active role in discouraging other nations from using cluster munitions in joint military operations.
"It's not enough for Arab leaders to complain about the horrors of cluster munitions in Lebanon and other countries in the region," said Whitson. "They should work to prevent any future use of this weapon by vowing never to use it themselves."
For more Human Rights Watch reporting on cluster munitions and the treaty banning their use, please visit:http://www.hrw.org/en/category/topic/arms/cluster-munitions
The deadly weapon, which leaves behind sub-munitions that can kill for years, has been used in the region - in particular in Lebanon, Iraq, Kuwait, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Western Sahara. Human Rights Watch, with a coalition of other groups, campaigned for an international treaty to deal with cluster munitions after Israel's massive use of these weapons in southern Lebanon in July-August 2006. These weapons left large swaths of Lebanon contaminated by the deadly unexploded sub-munitions, which since the end of fighting have killed or wounded 218 civilians as well as 47 people who were trying to locate and remove them.
"Lebanon and Tunisia have recognized how important it is to free the world of these deadly weapons," said Sarah Leah Whitson, director of the Middle East and North Africa division of Human Rights Watch. "No Arab state has used cluster bombs in the past 15 years, and they now should promise never to do so in the future and join this treaty."
A total of 94 countries, including Lebanon, signed the Convention on Cluster Munitions in Oslo, Norway on December 3-4, 2008. The treaty is now open for signature at the United Nations in New York. Thirteen states from the region participated in meetings that led to the creation of the convention, but have not yet signed: Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Libya, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and Yemen. Iran, Israel, and Syria refused to participate in the process that created the convention, and also have refused to sign the agreement.
"The more Arab states sign, the greater the stigma associated with using this weapon in the region and the harder it will be for Israel or any other state to use this weapon," Whitson said.
The Convention on Cluster Munitions is a major advance in the protection of civilians both during and after armed conflict. It prohibits the use, production, transfer, and stockpiling of cluster munitions. The convention also requires the clearance of affected areas within 10 years and destruction of stockpiled cluster munitions within eight years, and includes assistance provisions to help affected nations with clearance and victim assistance. The new treaty also includes a groundbreaking provision requiring states that join it to take an active role in discouraging other nations from using cluster munitions in joint military operations.
"It's not enough for Arab leaders to complain about the horrors of cluster munitions in Lebanon and other countries in the region," said Whitson. "They should work to prevent any future use of this weapon by vowing never to use it themselves."
For more Human Rights Watch reporting on cluster munitions and the treaty banning their use, please visit:http://www.hrw.org/en/category/topic/arms/cluster-munitions
Human Rights Watch
Lawyer: Iran detains women's rights activist
TEHRAN, Iran -- A lawyer for an Iranian activist says police detained the woman while she was campaigning for equal marriage rights for women.
The lawyer says Nafiseh Azad was detained Friday while collecting signatures for a two-year-old campaign pushing for equal rights for women in marriage, divorce and inheritance.
Attorney Nasrin Sotoudeh said Sunday that collecting signatures is not illegal. Over the past three years, however, Iranian authorities have detained many women seeking equal rights.
The lawyer says Nafiseh Azad was detained Friday while collecting signatures for a two-year-old campaign pushing for equal rights for women in marriage, divorce and inheritance.
Attorney Nasrin Sotoudeh said Sunday that collecting signatures is not illegal. Over the past three years, however, Iranian authorities have detained many women seeking equal rights.
In Iran, women need a male guardian's permission to marry. Only men have the right to seek divorce, and men inherit twice what women do from their parents.
Calls to authorities seeking comment on the detention were not returned late Sunday.
Calls to authorities seeking comment on the detention were not returned late Sunday.
The News & Observer
Iran hangs three murderers: reports
TEHRAN — Three Iranians convicted of murder have been hanged in the south of the country, local newspapers reported on Saturday.
One man convicted of killing two people and identified by only his first name Heshmat was hanged last week in prison in the town of Kazeroon, the government newspaper Iran said.
Two other men were executed on Wednesday in Adel-Abad prison in the southern town of Shiraz, the Etemad newspaper reported.
The latest hangings bring to at least 41 the number of executions in Iran so far this year. Iran executed at least 246 people last year, according to an AFP count.
Last year the Islamic republic stepped up its use of the death penalty in what it says is a bid to improve security in society.
Amnesty International says Iran carried out more death sentences in 2007 than any other country apart from China which executed 317 people.
Capital offences in Iran include murder, rape, armed robbery, drug trafficking and adultery.
One man convicted of killing two people and identified by only his first name Heshmat was hanged last week in prison in the town of Kazeroon, the government newspaper Iran said.
Two other men were executed on Wednesday in Adel-Abad prison in the southern town of Shiraz, the Etemad newspaper reported.
The latest hangings bring to at least 41 the number of executions in Iran so far this year. Iran executed at least 246 people last year, according to an AFP count.
Last year the Islamic republic stepped up its use of the death penalty in what it says is a bid to improve security in society.
Amnesty International says Iran carried out more death sentences in 2007 than any other country apart from China which executed 317 people.
Capital offences in Iran include murder, rape, armed robbery, drug trafficking and adultery.
AFP
Iranian FM: No talks scheduled with US in Munich
TEHRAN, Iran — Iran's official news agency says the country's foreign minister has no plans to meet with U.S. officials during a security conference this month in Munich, Germany.
Sunday's report quotes Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki as saying he and Iranian parliament speaker Ali Larijani will attend the 45th Munich Conference on Security Policy but have no plans to talk to U.S. officials.
Vice President Joe Biden is also scheduled to attend the conference, which takes place Feb. 6-8.
The gathering attracts senior government officials from around the world who often use the meeting to discuss diplomacy in an informal setting.
Sunday's report quotes Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki as saying he and Iranian parliament speaker Ali Larijani will attend the 45th Munich Conference on Security Policy but have no plans to talk to U.S. officials.
Vice President Joe Biden is also scheduled to attend the conference, which takes place Feb. 6-8.
The gathering attracts senior government officials from around the world who often use the meeting to discuss diplomacy in an informal setting.
Ap
Friday, January 30, 2009
Iran says US should change policy, not tactics
Iran said it would welcome President Barack Obama's offer of a change in U.S. policy provided apology for past "crimes" against Tehran.
Iran said on Wednesday it would welcome President Barack Obama's offer of a change in U.S. policy provided it involved a withdrawal of U.S. troops from abroad and an apology for past "crimes" against Tehran. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was speaking after Obama offered to extend a hand of peace if Iran "unclenched its fist". This marked a new approach from George W. Bush, who had sought to isolate Tehran, and Western diplomats said the change in Washington could offer a "once-in-a-generation" chance for the two foes to end three decades of hostility. "We welcome change but on condition that change is fundamental and on the right track," Ahmadinejad told a rally in western Iran, broadcast live on state television. "When they say policy would change, it means they would end America's military presence around the world," he said, referring to U.S. troops in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere in the world. Ahmadinejad said any change that was merely a shift in tactics would "soon be revealed". "Those who say they want to make change, this is the change they should make: they should apologise to the Iranian nation and try to make up for their dark background and the crimes they have committed against the Iranian nation," Ahmadinejad said. The new U.S. administration has said Obama would break from his predecessor by pursuing direct talks with Tehran but has also warned Iran to expect more pressure if it did not meet the U.N. Security Council demand to halt its disputed nuclear work.
'Go to hell'
Bush Ahmadinejad had harsh words for Obama's predecessor: "Mr Bush has gone into the trash can of history with a very black and shameful file full of treachery and killings." "He left and, God willing, he will go to hell," he added. A Western diplomat said Obama's election offered "a once in a generation opportunity" for a new start in relations between Tehran and Washington, which were cut after students seized the U.S. embassy in Tehran following the 1979 revolution. "They will never get a new U.S. president who is as balanced as Obama's public statements are, who talks about wanting to engage in a respectful way with Iran and who seems less encumbered by the baggage of the past," the diplomat said. "To me it is in Iran's clear interest to engage," he said. Mahmoud Abbasi, a 48-year-old taxi driver also speaking in the Iranian capital, was more hesitant. "We should not rush and accept direct talks without a plan and precaution," he said. Iranian opposition politician Ebrahim Yazdi said he did not expect movement on the issue of U.S. relations before Iran's June vote, when Ahmadinejad is expected to seek re-election. But he said better ties were in Iran's strategic and economic interest, adding: "The political atmosphere in Iran is now ripe, is suitable for direct negotiation with the United States."
Reuters
Iran Dissidents in Iraq Pose Thorny Issue for U.S.
For many years, the roughly 3,500 members of the Iranian dissident group Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) living quietly in Iraq drew little attention. But now the relatively obscure group is at the center of an increasingly contentious argument among leaders in Baghdad, Tehran and Washington, where decisions the new White House makes about the rebels will probably set the tone for U.S. relations with Iran in the near term.
The simmering issue of the MEK's fate flashed into the open earlier this month when Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki unexpectedly declared that the group would no longer be allowed to remain in Iraq. Shortly after that, Maliki's national security adviser, Muwaffaq al-Rubaie, said the MEK's camp roughly 40 miles north of Baghdad would be disbanded within two months, declaring during an appearance in Tehran that Iraq would not play host to threats toward its neighbor.
The issue grew more complicated on Jan. 26, when the European Union removed the MEK from its list of terrorist organizations, a roster that includes organizations such as Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). The E.U. move, which came after a long lobbying campaign by the MEK's supporters in Europe, sparked an outcry in Tehran. About 300 people were gathered around noon on Wednesday in front of the British Embassy in Tehran to protest the E.U. decision. Some in the crowd threw stones at the embassy, while others held up shoes on sticks in a show of deep disrespect in the Middle East.
"What people side with the enemy and kill their own people in a war?" said demonstrator Sina Zamanian, 17, referring to the MEK's alliance with Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war, which led them to settle in Iraq. "They are the worst kind of opportunistic terrorists and should be forever marked as such."
Nevertheless, some in Baghdad are calling for the group to be allowed to remain in Iraq, or at least to not be turned over to Iran, for political reasons. "We have to deal with this issue very delicately," says Ayad Jamal al-Deen, an Iraqi parliamentarian aligned with Shi'ite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. "I'm not here to defend this organization. I have no interest in them. But I am looking out for the Iraqi national interest." Al-Deen and other Iraqi political figures see the group essentially as a bargaining chip with Iran, one of the few Iraq holds against its powerful neighbor. They argue that simply shuttering the MEK camp as Iran demands squanders what precious little leverage Iraq has against Iran. Al-Deen adds, "In my opinion, Iraq has only this card, MEK, to pressure Iran."
At the moment, however, the MEK's ability to remain in Iraq depends on the will of the Americans. The Bush White House continued to use the military to protect the MEK at Camp Ashraf despite its current status as a terrorist organization on the U.S. list and periodic complaints by the emerging Iraqi government and Tehran, which says the group is still involved in subversive activity inside Iran. Outwardly, U.S. officials have said disbanding the camp would be in contravention of international humanitarian law because the group's members are likely to face persecution in Iran or Iraq. But many Iraqis and Iranians suspect that the U.S. keeps the camp open for intelligence purposes, since the MEK's spy network played a key role in uncovering Iran's secret uranium-enrichment program in 2002.
Maliki appears intent on pressing the issue anew with the Obama Administration, which will have to decide soon whether to keep offering U.S. protection to the group or to yield to Iraqi demands to close Camp Ashraf. If the White House allows the Iraqi government to close the camp, the Iranian leadership is likely to see the move as a sign that the new Administration is eager to ease tensions between Washington and Tehran. A continuation of the status quo, however, could chill Obama's early outreach efforts.
At Camp Ashraf, MEK members simply wait for word on what may happen to them as discussions continue in Baghdad, Tehran and Washington. Shahriar Kia, a spokesman for the group, says a closure of the camp would be a disaster for those living in what amounts to a protective quarantine for roughly the past seven years. "Closing down Camp Ashraf and the displacement of its residents, who are protected by the Geneva Conventions, against their will is a war crime," says Kia. "This will cause a humanitarian catastrophe."
The issue grew more complicated on Jan. 26, when the European Union removed the MEK from its list of terrorist organizations, a roster that includes organizations such as Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). The E.U. move, which came after a long lobbying campaign by the MEK's supporters in Europe, sparked an outcry in Tehran. About 300 people were gathered around noon on Wednesday in front of the British Embassy in Tehran to protest the E.U. decision. Some in the crowd threw stones at the embassy, while others held up shoes on sticks in a show of deep disrespect in the Middle East.
"What people side with the enemy and kill their own people in a war?" said demonstrator Sina Zamanian, 17, referring to the MEK's alliance with Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war, which led them to settle in Iraq. "They are the worst kind of opportunistic terrorists and should be forever marked as such."
Nevertheless, some in Baghdad are calling for the group to be allowed to remain in Iraq, or at least to not be turned over to Iran, for political reasons. "We have to deal with this issue very delicately," says Ayad Jamal al-Deen, an Iraqi parliamentarian aligned with Shi'ite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. "I'm not here to defend this organization. I have no interest in them. But I am looking out for the Iraqi national interest." Al-Deen and other Iraqi political figures see the group essentially as a bargaining chip with Iran, one of the few Iraq holds against its powerful neighbor. They argue that simply shuttering the MEK camp as Iran demands squanders what precious little leverage Iraq has against Iran. Al-Deen adds, "In my opinion, Iraq has only this card, MEK, to pressure Iran."
At the moment, however, the MEK's ability to remain in Iraq depends on the will of the Americans. The Bush White House continued to use the military to protect the MEK at Camp Ashraf despite its current status as a terrorist organization on the U.S. list and periodic complaints by the emerging Iraqi government and Tehran, which says the group is still involved in subversive activity inside Iran. Outwardly, U.S. officials have said disbanding the camp would be in contravention of international humanitarian law because the group's members are likely to face persecution in Iran or Iraq. But many Iraqis and Iranians suspect that the U.S. keeps the camp open for intelligence purposes, since the MEK's spy network played a key role in uncovering Iran's secret uranium-enrichment program in 2002.
Maliki appears intent on pressing the issue anew with the Obama Administration, which will have to decide soon whether to keep offering U.S. protection to the group or to yield to Iraqi demands to close Camp Ashraf. If the White House allows the Iraqi government to close the camp, the Iranian leadership is likely to see the move as a sign that the new Administration is eager to ease tensions between Washington and Tehran. A continuation of the status quo, however, could chill Obama's early outreach efforts.
At Camp Ashraf, MEK members simply wait for word on what may happen to them as discussions continue in Baghdad, Tehran and Washington. Shahriar Kia, a spokesman for the group, says a closure of the camp would be a disaster for those living in what amounts to a protective quarantine for roughly the past seven years. "Closing down Camp Ashraf and the displacement of its residents, who are protected by the Geneva Conventions, against their will is a war crime," says Kia. "This will cause a humanitarian catastrophe."
TIME
"5+1" to discuss Iran' nuclear program next week
Senior officials from major powers will meet in Germany next week to discuss the conflict with Iran over Tehran's nuclear program, the German FM said.
Senior officials from 5+1 will meet in Germany next week to discuss the conflict with Iran over Tehran's nuclear program, the German Foreign Ministry said on Thursday. Political directors from the United States, Russia, Britain, France, Germany and China are to meet in the Frankfurt area next Wednesday, a ministry spokeswoman said. The gathering will be the powers' first meeting since U.S. President Barack Obama came into office last week. The new U.S. administration has said Obama would break from his predecessor by pursuing direct talks with Tehran but has also warned Iran to expect more pressure if it did not meet the U.N. Security Council demand to halt uranium enrichment. Iran's Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said on Thursday Iran was ready to cooperate with Obama if the United States changed its policies and practices in the region.
Reuters
26 security officers were killed in Baluchistan
26 security officers were killed in Baluchistan in two separate incidents, Iranian officials sites reported. The first incidents was organised by People's Resistance Movement of Iran, Jondollah, in Sarawan on 20th of January. Jondollah reported in a statement that this operation was conducted to prevent supplies of arms and ammunitions to a military base near the border of Pakistan. This base is used for operations against Baluch fighters in the area between Sarawan and Zahedan. Jondollah claimed that they have used two roadside bombs to explode two cars which were loaded by ammunitions and arms. 14 security guards were killed in this operation.
The second incidents happened near Zahedan, the capital of Baluchistan on 25th Jan 09 in which 12 members of security forces died. The incidents happened when a group of Baluch guerrilla fighters ambushed several cars that were carrying logistics to their headquarters near the border between Iran and Pakistan. The Baluchistan Branch of the Organization of Iranian Fighters took the responsibility for this event.
This organization is also stated that these operations were intended to prevent further daily executions of Baluch people in different provinces of country. The Islamic Republic of Iran usually transfers the Baluch prisoners into other provinces and executes them for fabricated charges of drug trafficking.
No Baluch fighters was reported to be killed in these incidents while human rights organizations reported that the Iranians regime hanged 30 Iranians in five days. Most of the political prisoners that were executed or hanged were from Baluchistan or Kurdistan. The hanging of Kurdish and Baluch political activists and human rights organisers has been increased recently in Iran.
At the same time Iranian media reported that 24000 Shia missionaries have been dispatched to the Sunni areas of Baluchistan to convert Sunni people into Shia. This act has infuriated the Baluch and Sunni people all over Iran. The Islamic Republic of Iran designed the policy of Sunni conversions into Shia since the beginning of the revolution. So far they have not been successful in converting a large number of Sunnis. A handful of poor people have been bribed to become Shia. They have been given accommodation, some money and jobs. While 70 percent of the people in the province of Zanjan which is inhibited by Shias are living under poverty line, the government of Iran is spending a lot of money to bribe the Sunnis into Shiism. The newly converted Shias would be given some privileges for a short time and then they would be recruited by the Iranians security forces to spy on their community. Few of the newly Shia converts were killed as a result of their spying for the government.
As the confrontation between Baluch armed forces and Iranian security forces continue, the social environment in Baluchistan has become tenser. The Iranian government is also dismissing the Baluch workers from their jobs. They are not employing any educated Baluch people. The government is not creating any jobs; at that the same time they are closing the Borders to prevent border trading between Iran and Pakistan. As the Baluch people are completely deprived of governmental and bureaucratic jobs in Iran they have no any alternative but seeking border trading which is usually the exchange of foodstuff.
According to the official statistics of Iran, 76 percent of the Baluch people live under poverty line. Increasing unemployment and poverty motivate a large number of Baluch young people to fight for justice and equality opportunities. Since civil campaigning is not permitted in Baluchistan, most of these young men turn to armed groups to seek justice.
The Baluch people have chosen to get killed in the battlefield honorably with the Iranian security forces rather than surrendering to death by starvation; a policy the Iranian government has been implementing in Baluchistan. There is a saying in Baluchi which means living in poverty and misery is not worth living if you are pushed in it. What is worth, is the living of your choice with pride in freedom.
Reza Hossein Borr
20090130
The second incidents happened near Zahedan, the capital of Baluchistan on 25th Jan 09 in which 12 members of security forces died. The incidents happened when a group of Baluch guerrilla fighters ambushed several cars that were carrying logistics to their headquarters near the border between Iran and Pakistan. The Baluchistan Branch of the Organization of Iranian Fighters took the responsibility for this event.
This organization is also stated that these operations were intended to prevent further daily executions of Baluch people in different provinces of country. The Islamic Republic of Iran usually transfers the Baluch prisoners into other provinces and executes them for fabricated charges of drug trafficking.
No Baluch fighters was reported to be killed in these incidents while human rights organizations reported that the Iranians regime hanged 30 Iranians in five days. Most of the political prisoners that were executed or hanged were from Baluchistan or Kurdistan. The hanging of Kurdish and Baluch political activists and human rights organisers has been increased recently in Iran.
At the same time Iranian media reported that 24000 Shia missionaries have been dispatched to the Sunni areas of Baluchistan to convert Sunni people into Shia. This act has infuriated the Baluch and Sunni people all over Iran. The Islamic Republic of Iran designed the policy of Sunni conversions into Shia since the beginning of the revolution. So far they have not been successful in converting a large number of Sunnis. A handful of poor people have been bribed to become Shia. They have been given accommodation, some money and jobs. While 70 percent of the people in the province of Zanjan which is inhibited by Shias are living under poverty line, the government of Iran is spending a lot of money to bribe the Sunnis into Shiism. The newly converted Shias would be given some privileges for a short time and then they would be recruited by the Iranians security forces to spy on their community. Few of the newly Shia converts were killed as a result of their spying for the government.
As the confrontation between Baluch armed forces and Iranian security forces continue, the social environment in Baluchistan has become tenser. The Iranian government is also dismissing the Baluch workers from their jobs. They are not employing any educated Baluch people. The government is not creating any jobs; at that the same time they are closing the Borders to prevent border trading between Iran and Pakistan. As the Baluch people are completely deprived of governmental and bureaucratic jobs in Iran they have no any alternative but seeking border trading which is usually the exchange of foodstuff.
According to the official statistics of Iran, 76 percent of the Baluch people live under poverty line. Increasing unemployment and poverty motivate a large number of Baluch young people to fight for justice and equality opportunities. Since civil campaigning is not permitted in Baluchistan, most of these young men turn to armed groups to seek justice.
The Baluch people have chosen to get killed in the battlefield honorably with the Iranian security forces rather than surrendering to death by starvation; a policy the Iranian government has been implementing in Baluchistan. There is a saying in Baluchi which means living in poverty and misery is not worth living if you are pushed in it. What is worth, is the living of your choice with pride in freedom.
Reza Hossein Borr
20090130
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Iranian Leader Demands U.S. Apology
(TEHRAN, Iran) — The Iranian president called for "profound changes" in U.S. foreign policy during a speech Wednesday, saying the Islamic Republic would welcome a real and fundamental shift from the new American administration. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's comments in the western city of Kermanshah come as Obama has indicated a new willingness to reach out to Muslims and the importance of engaging with Iran, a country the Bush administration often singled out as the most dangerous in the region. (See pictures of Ahmadinejad in New York.)
Without mentioning President Barack Obama by name, Ahmadinejad Wednesday repeatedly referred to those who want to bring "change," a word used often in Obama's election campaign, and indicated that Iran would be looking to see if there would be substantive differences in U.S. policy.
"We will wait patiently, listen to their words carefully, scrutinize their actions under a magnifier and if change happens truly and fundamentally, we will welcome that," Ahmadinejad said, speaking to a crowd of thousands.
But the Iranian leader also criticized the United States, saying it should apologize to Iran for past misdeeds.
"The change will be to apologize to the Iranian nation and try to compensate for their dark records and the crimes they have committed against the Iranian nation," he said.
The hardline president also called on Washington to withdraw its troops from around the world and stop supporting Israel.
"Change means giving up support for the rootless, uncivilized, fabricated, murdering ... Zionists and let the Palestinian nation decide its own destiny," he said. "Change means putting an end to U.S. military presence in (different parts of) the world."
Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Mehdi Safari, speaking in Athens, Greece, said Tuesday that it was too early to say whether relations with the United States would improve with Obama as president.
Washington is at odds with Tehran over Iran's nuclear program and its Mideast policy that seeks to destroy Israel and supports the militant groups Hezbollah and Hamas.
The U.S. and some of its allies accuse Iran of seeking to build nuclear weapons. Tehran denies the charge and refuses to give up uranium enrichment, saying it has the right under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to produce nuclear fuel.
The U.S. broke off diplomatic relations with Iran after hardline students stormed the U.S. Embassy in Tehran in 1979.
TIME
Without mentioning President Barack Obama by name, Ahmadinejad Wednesday repeatedly referred to those who want to bring "change," a word used often in Obama's election campaign, and indicated that Iran would be looking to see if there would be substantive differences in U.S. policy.
"We will wait patiently, listen to their words carefully, scrutinize their actions under a magnifier and if change happens truly and fundamentally, we will welcome that," Ahmadinejad said, speaking to a crowd of thousands.
But the Iranian leader also criticized the United States, saying it should apologize to Iran for past misdeeds.
"The change will be to apologize to the Iranian nation and try to compensate for their dark records and the crimes they have committed against the Iranian nation," he said.
The hardline president also called on Washington to withdraw its troops from around the world and stop supporting Israel.
"Change means giving up support for the rootless, uncivilized, fabricated, murdering ... Zionists and let the Palestinian nation decide its own destiny," he said. "Change means putting an end to U.S. military presence in (different parts of) the world."
Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Mehdi Safari, speaking in Athens, Greece, said Tuesday that it was too early to say whether relations with the United States would improve with Obama as president.
Washington is at odds with Tehran over Iran's nuclear program and its Mideast policy that seeks to destroy Israel and supports the militant groups Hezbollah and Hamas.
The U.S. and some of its allies accuse Iran of seeking to build nuclear weapons. Tehran denies the charge and refuses to give up uranium enrichment, saying it has the right under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to produce nuclear fuel.
The U.S. broke off diplomatic relations with Iran after hardline students stormed the U.S. Embassy in Tehran in 1979.
Egypt attacks Iran and allies in Arab world
CAIRO - Egypt aired its grievances against Iran, the Palestinian Islamist movement Hamas and the Lebanese Shi'ite group Hezbollah, saying they worked together in the fighting over Gaza to provoke conflict in the Middle East.
"(They tried) to turn the region to confrontation in the interest of Iran, which is trying to use its cards to escape Western pressure ... on the nuclear file," Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit said in an interview with Orbit satellite channel broadcast Wednesday.
Aboul Gheit also said that Egypt undermined Qatar's attempts to arrange a formal Arab summit on Gaza earlier this month, arguing that it would have damaged "joint Arab action."
"Egypt made the summit fail... This summit, if it had taken place as an Arab summit with a proper quorum, would have damaged joint Arab action. We can see what others do not see," he said.
The interview was broadcast Tuesday evening and Wednesday morning and the state news agency MENA carried excerpts.
The comments are the first acknowledgement by Egypt that it actively sought to prevent the Doha summit on January 16, which was the subject of a bitter tug-of-war between rival Arab states.
It also indicated that a reconciliation meeting in Kuwait last week between Egypt and Saudi Arabia on one hand, and Qatar and Syria on the other, had only a short-term effect.
Qatar failed to win enough support to hold a formal Arab League summit on Gaza but it went ahead anyway with an informal consultative meeting of Arab leaders.
The wrangling reflected deep divisions between Arab governments. On one side Saudi Arabia and Egypt, wary of the Islamist group Hamas in Gaza, favored discussing Gaza at a separate economic summit in Kuwait a few days later.
Diplomats say Egypt resents the Qatari challenge to its traditional role as leading Arab mediator and dislikes the influence of the satellite television channel Al Jazeera, which is based in Doha and owned by the Qatari government.
"Some people imagined that a satellite channel could bring down the Egyptian state, without realizing that Egypt is much stronger than that," Aboul Gheit said.
"Egypt is very big and has extensive influence despite attempts to influence this stance and role, whether in the Al Jazeera channel or other channels," he added.
The Egyptian minister also criticized Hamas for what he called its coup against the forces of the Palestinian Authority in the Gaza Strip in 2007.
"(They tried) to turn the region to confrontation in the interest of Iran, which is trying to use its cards to escape Western pressure ... on the nuclear file," Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit said in an interview with Orbit satellite channel broadcast Wednesday.
Aboul Gheit also said that Egypt undermined Qatar's attempts to arrange a formal Arab summit on Gaza earlier this month, arguing that it would have damaged "joint Arab action."
"Egypt made the summit fail... This summit, if it had taken place as an Arab summit with a proper quorum, would have damaged joint Arab action. We can see what others do not see," he said.
The interview was broadcast Tuesday evening and Wednesday morning and the state news agency MENA carried excerpts.
The comments are the first acknowledgement by Egypt that it actively sought to prevent the Doha summit on January 16, which was the subject of a bitter tug-of-war between rival Arab states.
It also indicated that a reconciliation meeting in Kuwait last week between Egypt and Saudi Arabia on one hand, and Qatar and Syria on the other, had only a short-term effect.
Qatar failed to win enough support to hold a formal Arab League summit on Gaza but it went ahead anyway with an informal consultative meeting of Arab leaders.
The wrangling reflected deep divisions between Arab governments. On one side Saudi Arabia and Egypt, wary of the Islamist group Hamas in Gaza, favored discussing Gaza at a separate economic summit in Kuwait a few days later.
Diplomats say Egypt resents the Qatari challenge to its traditional role as leading Arab mediator and dislikes the influence of the satellite television channel Al Jazeera, which is based in Doha and owned by the Qatari government.
"Some people imagined that a satellite channel could bring down the Egyptian state, without realizing that Egypt is much stronger than that," Aboul Gheit said.
"Egypt is very big and has extensive influence despite attempts to influence this stance and role, whether in the Al Jazeera channel or other channels," he added.
The Egyptian minister also criticized Hamas for what he called its coup against the forces of the Palestinian Authority in the Gaza Strip in 2007.
Reuters
Soft-spoken line from Washington may terrify Tehran
Ahmadinejad's ferocity underlines the potency of the new policy of seeking to influence rather than oust the ayatollahs
The letter to Iran being drafted in Washington represents a determined break from past US policy but officials said yesterday there was still considerable debate on how and when to engage Tehran in talks.
Details have yet to be decided. At what level should talks take place? Should they grow organically from the existing six-nation negotiating group or open up a new track? When should negotiations start and, in particular, should they be postponed until Iran's presidential elections in June, for fear of helping Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's re-election campaign, which was formally launched yesterday?
There is one thing everyone agrees on – it is impossible to do any kind of business with the current Iranian president. Ahmadinejad's speech in Kermanshah yesterday, demanding complete US withdrawal from all overseas deployments, clearly illustrated that.
"Those who say they want to make change, this is the change they should make: they should apologise to the Iranian nation and try to make up for their dark background and the crimes they have committed against the Iranian nation," Ahmadinejad said. He specifically mentioned the toppling of the government in 1953, the support for the shah and for Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war, and the downing of an Iranian airliner in 1988.
He fulminated against what he said were efforts to block Tehran's supposedly peaceful nuclear power programme and hinder Iran's development since the 1979 revolution, the event which along with the US embassy hostage crisis served to define bilateral relations for a generation.
And he had harsh words for George Bush, who he said "has gone into the trash can of history with a very black and shameful file full of treachery and killings. He left and, God willing, he will go to hell."
It was never clear whether the Bush administration was seeking to bring about regime change in Tehran or simply trying to persuade Iran's theocratic rulers to change policy on uranium enrichment.
The ambiguity was inevitable. The administration itself never quite made up its mind, and different strategies rose to the top of the White House agenda at different times, depending on who was winning the battle for the president's ear.
While mixed messages emanated from the Bush administration, only one was clearly received in Tehran – that Iran was next on the Axis of Evil list after Iraq.
The lesson of the Iraq invasion for the Iranian leadership was that Saddam lost his job and then his life not because he might have had weapons of mass destruction but because he had none. North Korea, the third member the axis, which had nuclear bombs, was treated with much greater respect. The hard task ahead for the Obama team is how to correct those perverse incentives.
Obama is intent on pursuing a very different approach. US policy is focused now on influencing the ayatollahs' behaviour and perceptions, not driving them out. The new president this week repeated his inaugural line, "we will extend our hand if you will unclench your fist", and explicitly addressed it to Tehran. The ferocity of Ahmadinejad's response does make one thing clear: the Tehran hardliners are more terrified of a moderate and charismatic new voice from Washington than all the sabres rattled by the Bush administration.
Obama does not trigger the same Persian-nationalist response that used to rally Iranians around Ahmadinejad's government at the prospect of American bombs. Perhaps more importantly, given the nature of Iranian elections, the arrival of a soft-talking administration may change the mind of the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, about the sort of president he wants to see elected.
The more radical thinkers now installed at their desks in Washington argue there is no need to wait until the June presidential elections. The Iranian presidency does not decide nuclear policy, even if it influences the political mood and sets limits on what is negotiable.
That wing argues there are ways of sending messages and making contacts that will not benefit Ahmadinejad. The opening of an American-staffed US interests section in Tehran, considered then rejected by the Bush administration, is on the table as a first step in a possible progression towards a normal relationship.
The administration radicals believe it is time to invert what they see as another fundamental flaw in Bush policy – tying US interests to reactionary Sunni regimes in the Arab world as a bulwark against Shia militancy. Tehran is militant, the new thinkers argue, but it is at least a rational state actor, with defined goals and interests, and therefore ultimately more amenable to cool discussion and engagement.
The more cautious wing warns against hasty interference in an opaque political system with all the unintended consequences that might entail.
The letter to Iran being drafted in Washington represents a determined break from past US policy but officials said yesterday there was still considerable debate on how and when to engage Tehran in talks.
Details have yet to be decided. At what level should talks take place? Should they grow organically from the existing six-nation negotiating group or open up a new track? When should negotiations start and, in particular, should they be postponed until Iran's presidential elections in June, for fear of helping Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's re-election campaign, which was formally launched yesterday?
There is one thing everyone agrees on – it is impossible to do any kind of business with the current Iranian president. Ahmadinejad's speech in Kermanshah yesterday, demanding complete US withdrawal from all overseas deployments, clearly illustrated that.
"Those who say they want to make change, this is the change they should make: they should apologise to the Iranian nation and try to make up for their dark background and the crimes they have committed against the Iranian nation," Ahmadinejad said. He specifically mentioned the toppling of the government in 1953, the support for the shah and for Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war, and the downing of an Iranian airliner in 1988.
He fulminated against what he said were efforts to block Tehran's supposedly peaceful nuclear power programme and hinder Iran's development since the 1979 revolution, the event which along with the US embassy hostage crisis served to define bilateral relations for a generation.
And he had harsh words for George Bush, who he said "has gone into the trash can of history with a very black and shameful file full of treachery and killings. He left and, God willing, he will go to hell."
It was never clear whether the Bush administration was seeking to bring about regime change in Tehran or simply trying to persuade Iran's theocratic rulers to change policy on uranium enrichment.
The ambiguity was inevitable. The administration itself never quite made up its mind, and different strategies rose to the top of the White House agenda at different times, depending on who was winning the battle for the president's ear.
While mixed messages emanated from the Bush administration, only one was clearly received in Tehran – that Iran was next on the Axis of Evil list after Iraq.
The lesson of the Iraq invasion for the Iranian leadership was that Saddam lost his job and then his life not because he might have had weapons of mass destruction but because he had none. North Korea, the third member the axis, which had nuclear bombs, was treated with much greater respect. The hard task ahead for the Obama team is how to correct those perverse incentives.
Obama is intent on pursuing a very different approach. US policy is focused now on influencing the ayatollahs' behaviour and perceptions, not driving them out. The new president this week repeated his inaugural line, "we will extend our hand if you will unclench your fist", and explicitly addressed it to Tehran. The ferocity of Ahmadinejad's response does make one thing clear: the Tehran hardliners are more terrified of a moderate and charismatic new voice from Washington than all the sabres rattled by the Bush administration.
Obama does not trigger the same Persian-nationalist response that used to rally Iranians around Ahmadinejad's government at the prospect of American bombs. Perhaps more importantly, given the nature of Iranian elections, the arrival of a soft-talking administration may change the mind of the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, about the sort of president he wants to see elected.
The more radical thinkers now installed at their desks in Washington argue there is no need to wait until the June presidential elections. The Iranian presidency does not decide nuclear policy, even if it influences the political mood and sets limits on what is negotiable.
That wing argues there are ways of sending messages and making contacts that will not benefit Ahmadinejad. The opening of an American-staffed US interests section in Tehran, considered then rejected by the Bush administration, is on the table as a first step in a possible progression towards a normal relationship.
The administration radicals believe it is time to invert what they see as another fundamental flaw in Bush policy – tying US interests to reactionary Sunni regimes in the Arab world as a bulwark against Shia militancy. Tehran is militant, the new thinkers argue, but it is at least a rational state actor, with defined goals and interests, and therefore ultimately more amenable to cool discussion and engagement.
The more cautious wing warns against hasty interference in an opaque political system with all the unintended consequences that might entail.
Julian Borger, diplomatic editor
Guardian
Revealed: the letter Obama team hope will heal Iran rift
Symbolic gesture gives assurances that US does not want to topple Islamic regimeOne draft urges Iranians to consider the bene? ts of losing their pariah status in the west. Photograph: Vahid Salemi/AP
Officials of Barack Obama's administration have drafted a letter to Iran from the president aimed at unfreezing US-Iranian relations and opening the way for face-to-face talks, the Guardian has learned.
The US state department has been working on drafts of the letter since Obama was elected on 4 November last year. It is in reply to a lengthy letter of congratulations sent by the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, on 6 November.
Diplomats said Obama's letter would be a symbolic gesture to mark a change in tone from the hostile one adopted by the Bush administration, which portrayed Iran as part of an "axis of evil".
It would be intended to allay the suspicions of Iran's leaders and pave the way for Obama to engage them directly, a break with past policy.
State department officials have composed at least three drafts of the letter, which gives assurances that Washington does not want to overthrow the Islamic regime, but merely seeks a change in its behaviour. The letter would be addressed to the Iranian people and sent directly to Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, or released as an open letter.
One draft proposal suggests that Iran should compare its relatively low standard of living with that of some of its more prosperous neighbours, and contemplate the benefits of losing its pariah status in the west. Although the tone is conciliatory, it also calls on Iran to end what the US calls state sponsorship of terrorism.
The letter is being considered by the new secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, as part of a sweeping review of US policy on Iran. A decision on sending it is not expected until the review is complete.
In an interview on Monday with the al-Arabiya television network, Obama hinted at a more friendly approach towards the Islamic Republic.
Ahmadinejad said yesterday that he was waiting patiently to see what the Obama administration would come up with. "We will listen to the statements closely, we will carefully study their actions, and, if there are real changes, we will welcome it," he said.
Ahmadinejad, who confirmed that he would stand for election again in June, said it was unclear whether the Obama administration was intent on just a shift in tactics or was seeking fundamental change. He called on Washington to apologise for its actions against Iran over the past 60 years, including US support for a 1953 coup that ousted the democratically elected government, and the US shooting down of an Iranian passenger plane in 1988.
The state department refused to comment yesterday on the draft letters.
US concern about Iran mainly centres on its uranium enrichment programme, which Washington claims is intended to provide the country with a nuclear weapons capability. Iran claims the programme is for civilian purposes.
The diplomatic moves are given increased urgency by fears that Israel might take unilateral action to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities.
The scale of the problem facing the new American president was reinforced yesterday when a senior aide to Ahmadinejad, Aliakbar Javanfekr, said that, despite the calls from the US, Iran had no intention of stopping its nuclear activities. When asked about a UN resolution calling for the suspension of Iran's uranium enrichment, Javanfekr, the presidential adviser for press affairs, replied: "We are past that stage."
One of the chief Iranian concerns revolves around suspicion that the US is engaged in covert action aimed at regime change, including support for separatist groups in areas such as Kurdistan, Sistan-Baluchestan and Khuzestan.
The state department has repeatedly denied that there is any American support for such groups.
In its dying days, the Bush administration was planning to open a US interests section in the Iranian capital Tehran, one step down from an embassy. Bush's secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, said that never happened because attention was diverted by the Russian invasion of Georgia. Others say that rightwingers in the Bush administration mounted a rearguard action to block it.
The idea has resurfaced, but if there are direct talks with Iran, it may be decided that a diplomatic presence would obviate the need for a diplomatic mission there, at least in the short term.
While Obama is taking the lead on policy towards Iran, the administration will soon announce that Dennis Ross will become a special envoy to the country, following the appointments last week of George Mitchell, the veteran US mediator, as special envoy to the Middle East, and Richard Holbrooke, who helped to broker the Bosnia peace agreement, as special envoy to Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Ross, who took a leading role in the Middle East peace talks in Bill Clinton's administration, will be responsible on a day-to-day basis for implementing policy towards Iran.
In a graphic sign of Iranian mistrust, the hardline newspaper Kayhan, which is considered close to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has denounced Ross as a "Zionist lobbyist".
Saeed Leylaz, a Tehran-based analyst, said a US letter would have to be accompanied by security guarantees and an agreement to drop economic sanctions. "If they send such a letter it will be a very significant step towards better ties, but they should be careful in not thinking Tehran will respond immediately," he said.
"There will be disputes inside the system about such a letter. There are lot of radicals who don't want to see ordinary relations between Tehran and Washington. To convince Iran, they should send a very clear message that they are not going to try to destroy the regime."
Officials of Barack Obama's administration have drafted a letter to Iran from the president aimed at unfreezing US-Iranian relations and opening the way for face-to-face talks, the Guardian has learned.
The US state department has been working on drafts of the letter since Obama was elected on 4 November last year. It is in reply to a lengthy letter of congratulations sent by the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, on 6 November.
Diplomats said Obama's letter would be a symbolic gesture to mark a change in tone from the hostile one adopted by the Bush administration, which portrayed Iran as part of an "axis of evil".
It would be intended to allay the suspicions of Iran's leaders and pave the way for Obama to engage them directly, a break with past policy.
State department officials have composed at least three drafts of the letter, which gives assurances that Washington does not want to overthrow the Islamic regime, but merely seeks a change in its behaviour. The letter would be addressed to the Iranian people and sent directly to Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, or released as an open letter.
One draft proposal suggests that Iran should compare its relatively low standard of living with that of some of its more prosperous neighbours, and contemplate the benefits of losing its pariah status in the west. Although the tone is conciliatory, it also calls on Iran to end what the US calls state sponsorship of terrorism.
The letter is being considered by the new secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, as part of a sweeping review of US policy on Iran. A decision on sending it is not expected until the review is complete.
In an interview on Monday with the al-Arabiya television network, Obama hinted at a more friendly approach towards the Islamic Republic.
Ahmadinejad said yesterday that he was waiting patiently to see what the Obama administration would come up with. "We will listen to the statements closely, we will carefully study their actions, and, if there are real changes, we will welcome it," he said.
Ahmadinejad, who confirmed that he would stand for election again in June, said it was unclear whether the Obama administration was intent on just a shift in tactics or was seeking fundamental change. He called on Washington to apologise for its actions against Iran over the past 60 years, including US support for a 1953 coup that ousted the democratically elected government, and the US shooting down of an Iranian passenger plane in 1988.
The state department refused to comment yesterday on the draft letters.
US concern about Iran mainly centres on its uranium enrichment programme, which Washington claims is intended to provide the country with a nuclear weapons capability. Iran claims the programme is for civilian purposes.
The diplomatic moves are given increased urgency by fears that Israel might take unilateral action to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities.
The scale of the problem facing the new American president was reinforced yesterday when a senior aide to Ahmadinejad, Aliakbar Javanfekr, said that, despite the calls from the US, Iran had no intention of stopping its nuclear activities. When asked about a UN resolution calling for the suspension of Iran's uranium enrichment, Javanfekr, the presidential adviser for press affairs, replied: "We are past that stage."
One of the chief Iranian concerns revolves around suspicion that the US is engaged in covert action aimed at regime change, including support for separatist groups in areas such as Kurdistan, Sistan-Baluchestan and Khuzestan.
The state department has repeatedly denied that there is any American support for such groups.
In its dying days, the Bush administration was planning to open a US interests section in the Iranian capital Tehran, one step down from an embassy. Bush's secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, said that never happened because attention was diverted by the Russian invasion of Georgia. Others say that rightwingers in the Bush administration mounted a rearguard action to block it.
The idea has resurfaced, but if there are direct talks with Iran, it may be decided that a diplomatic presence would obviate the need for a diplomatic mission there, at least in the short term.
While Obama is taking the lead on policy towards Iran, the administration will soon announce that Dennis Ross will become a special envoy to the country, following the appointments last week of George Mitchell, the veteran US mediator, as special envoy to the Middle East, and Richard Holbrooke, who helped to broker the Bosnia peace agreement, as special envoy to Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Ross, who took a leading role in the Middle East peace talks in Bill Clinton's administration, will be responsible on a day-to-day basis for implementing policy towards Iran.
In a graphic sign of Iranian mistrust, the hardline newspaper Kayhan, which is considered close to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has denounced Ross as a "Zionist lobbyist".
Saeed Leylaz, a Tehran-based analyst, said a US letter would have to be accompanied by security guarantees and an agreement to drop economic sanctions. "If they send such a letter it will be a very significant step towards better ties, but they should be careful in not thinking Tehran will respond immediately," he said.
"There will be disputes inside the system about such a letter. There are lot of radicals who don't want to see ordinary relations between Tehran and Washington. To convince Iran, they should send a very clear message that they are not going to try to destroy the regime."
Guardian
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Iranian Terrorist Regime : EU not serious about fighting terrorism
TEHRAN - The European Union’s decision to remove the Mojahedin Khalq Organization (MKO) from its terrorist list shows that the EU is not really committed to fighting terrorism, Tehran’s interim Friday prayers leader Ayatollah Seyyed Ahmad Khatami said here on Monday.
He made the remarks shortly after the EU foreign ministers approved a decision to remove the MKO from the EU list of banned terrorist organizations, even though the organization is recognized as a terrorist group by much of the international community, including the United States. The recent move by the EU shows that its boasting about “liberal democracy” is just lies, he told the Mehr News Agency. Removing the MKO, which has killed 13,000 innocent people, including 72 Iranian officials on one day, from the list of terrorist organizations is total support for terrorism, he noted. “The EU, with this action, showed that it uses terms like human rights and the campaign against terrorism only as a means to serve its own evil interests,” he added. In pursuing its interests, the EU is even prepared to support a terrorist organization like the MKO, Khatami observed. Such evil acts are meant to counter Iran’s great revolution, but in this confrontation the arrogant powers will not win, he stated. Sooner or later the United States and the European Union will have to recognize Islamic Iran as a major power in the world, he noted. Meanwhile, MP Heshmatollah Falahatpisheh of the Majlis National Security and Foreign Policy Committee said on Monday that Iran devised a plan to try the group at international tribunals after EU diplomats put forward the proposal to remove the MKO from the bloc’s list of terrorist organizations. However, MKO members who have not participated in the organization’s terrorist activities are allowed to return to Iran, he added. Iranian officials have called on the Iraqi government to intensify its efforts to close Camp Ashraf, where 3500 MKO members are being held under house arrest, and to expel them. Iraq has assured Iran that it will soon close the camp and that MKO members will be expelled from Iraq. Shortly before the EU announced its decision on Monday, MP Eivaz Heidarpour of the Majlis Foreign Policy and National Security Committee said that Iran should reconsider its relations with those European states that are seeking to remove the Mojahedin Khalq Organization from the terrorist list. The Europeans are aware of the fact that the MKO is one of the “most dangerous” terrorist groups, Heidarpour told the Mehr News Agency. The terrorist crimes committed by the MKO are so well documented that no European leaders will agree to rehabilitate the organization, he opined. Iran should reconsider and even break off its relations with some European states, he insisted.
Tehran Times Iranian Regime News Agency
He made the remarks shortly after the EU foreign ministers approved a decision to remove the MKO from the EU list of banned terrorist organizations, even though the organization is recognized as a terrorist group by much of the international community, including the United States. The recent move by the EU shows that its boasting about “liberal democracy” is just lies, he told the Mehr News Agency. Removing the MKO, which has killed 13,000 innocent people, including 72 Iranian officials on one day, from the list of terrorist organizations is total support for terrorism, he noted. “The EU, with this action, showed that it uses terms like human rights and the campaign against terrorism only as a means to serve its own evil interests,” he added. In pursuing its interests, the EU is even prepared to support a terrorist organization like the MKO, Khatami observed. Such evil acts are meant to counter Iran’s great revolution, but in this confrontation the arrogant powers will not win, he stated. Sooner or later the United States and the European Union will have to recognize Islamic Iran as a major power in the world, he noted. Meanwhile, MP Heshmatollah Falahatpisheh of the Majlis National Security and Foreign Policy Committee said on Monday that Iran devised a plan to try the group at international tribunals after EU diplomats put forward the proposal to remove the MKO from the bloc’s list of terrorist organizations. However, MKO members who have not participated in the organization’s terrorist activities are allowed to return to Iran, he added. Iranian officials have called on the Iraqi government to intensify its efforts to close Camp Ashraf, where 3500 MKO members are being held under house arrest, and to expel them. Iraq has assured Iran that it will soon close the camp and that MKO members will be expelled from Iraq. Shortly before the EU announced its decision on Monday, MP Eivaz Heidarpour of the Majlis Foreign Policy and National Security Committee said that Iran should reconsider its relations with those European states that are seeking to remove the Mojahedin Khalq Organization from the terrorist list. The Europeans are aware of the fact that the MKO is one of the “most dangerous” terrorist groups, Heidarpour told the Mehr News Agency. The terrorist crimes committed by the MKO are so well documented that no European leaders will agree to rehabilitate the organization, he opined. Iran should reconsider and even break off its relations with some European states, he insisted.
Clinton Sees an Opportunity for Iran to Return to Diplomacy
WASHINGTON — Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Tuesday that Iran had a “clear opportunity” to engage with the international community, amplifying the conciliatory tone struck a day earlier by President Obama toward Iran and the rest of the Muslim world.
Sketching out an ambitious diplomatic agenda, Mrs. Clinton also suggested that there could be some form of direct communication between the United States and North Korea. And she said relations with China had been excessively influenced by economic issues during the Bush administration.
Mrs. Clinton, in her first remarks to reporters since becoming the nation’s chief diplomat, said, “There is a clear opportunity for the Iranians, as the president expressed in his interview, to demonstrate some willingness to engage meaningfully with the international community.”
Speaking Monday to an Arabic-language news channel, Al Arabiya, Mr. Obama reiterated his determination that the United States explore ways to engage directly with Iran, even as he said Tehran’s suspected pursuit of a nuclear weapon and its support for terrorist groups were destabilizing.
Less than a week into her job, Mrs. Clinton seemed energized. She traveled to the White House on Monday to help send off the administration’s special envoy to the Middle East, George J. Mitchell, and she has racked up a list of calls to nearly 40 foreign leaders or foreign ministers.
The world, Mrs. Clinton asserted, was yearning for a new American foreign policy.
“There is a great exhalation of breath going on around the world,” she said. “We’ve got a lot of damage to repair.”
Mrs. Clinton did not disclose the options under consideration for reaching out to Iran, beyond mentioning the existing multilateral talks involving Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China. But she indicated that she and Mr. Obama were thinking broadly.
The multilateral group is scheduled to meet next week in Germany, and European diplomats said they hoped that the meeting would provide the first clues about the administration’s strategy.
The administration is expected to name Dennis B. Ross, a longtime Middle East peace negotiator, to a senior post handling Iran, according to State Department officials. That Mr. Ross was not at the same meeting as Mr. Mitchell surprised some people who follow Iranian issues, given how long his appointment had been rumored. But officials said Mr. Ross was at the State Department on Monday.
Analysts said the timing for an American overture to Iran was better now than it had been for a long time.
“The Iranian regime is in a truly desperate situation,” said Abbas Milani, the director of Iranian studies at Stanford University. “The regime is in a much more amenable mood because the economy is in a shambles. They’re also dealing with someone whose name is Barack Hussein Obama.”
As for North Korea, Mrs. Clinton said the administration was committed to existing multilateral talks over its nuclear program. But she noted that in the past, there had been bilateral talks within the current six-nation arrangement. “We’re going to pursue steps that we think are effective,” she said.
On China, Mrs. Clinton said that the United States needed “a more comprehensive approach” and that the strategic dialogue of the Bush administration “turned into an economic dialogue.”
“The economy will always be a centerpiece of our relationship, but we want it to be part of a broader agenda,” Mrs. Clinton said. She did not specify what other issues the United States would put on the table.
Last week, Timothy F. Geithner, who was sworn in Monday as Treasury secretary, signaled a potentially more confrontational stance toward China, saying in written testimony to the Senate that China manipulated its currency.
During the Bush administration, the Treasury Department, particularly under Henry M. Paulson Jr., played a lead role in coordinating policy toward China. Mrs. Clinton has pushed for the State Department to increase its profile on economic affairs, which suggests a stronger role on China.
Mrs. Clinton declined to be drawn out on details about changes in policy toward Iran or another thorny challenge, Afghanistan. Both, she said, were the subject of policy reviews.
She also said little about Mr. Mitchell’s first mission, except to note that the United States was focused for now on talks between the Israelis and the Palestinians. She did not address Syria’s role.
Mrs. Clinton brushed off suggestions that the appointment of Mr. Mitchell and another emissary — Richard C. Holbrooke, who will be special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan — could lead to conflict or rivalries in policy making.
“Oh, no, no,” she said. “I think we have already established a collegial, effective working relationship.”
The New York Times
Sketching out an ambitious diplomatic agenda, Mrs. Clinton also suggested that there could be some form of direct communication between the United States and North Korea. And she said relations with China had been excessively influenced by economic issues during the Bush administration.
Mrs. Clinton, in her first remarks to reporters since becoming the nation’s chief diplomat, said, “There is a clear opportunity for the Iranians, as the president expressed in his interview, to demonstrate some willingness to engage meaningfully with the international community.”
Speaking Monday to an Arabic-language news channel, Al Arabiya, Mr. Obama reiterated his determination that the United States explore ways to engage directly with Iran, even as he said Tehran’s suspected pursuit of a nuclear weapon and its support for terrorist groups were destabilizing.
Less than a week into her job, Mrs. Clinton seemed energized. She traveled to the White House on Monday to help send off the administration’s special envoy to the Middle East, George J. Mitchell, and she has racked up a list of calls to nearly 40 foreign leaders or foreign ministers.
The world, Mrs. Clinton asserted, was yearning for a new American foreign policy.
“There is a great exhalation of breath going on around the world,” she said. “We’ve got a lot of damage to repair.”
Mrs. Clinton did not disclose the options under consideration for reaching out to Iran, beyond mentioning the existing multilateral talks involving Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China. But she indicated that she and Mr. Obama were thinking broadly.
The multilateral group is scheduled to meet next week in Germany, and European diplomats said they hoped that the meeting would provide the first clues about the administration’s strategy.
The administration is expected to name Dennis B. Ross, a longtime Middle East peace negotiator, to a senior post handling Iran, according to State Department officials. That Mr. Ross was not at the same meeting as Mr. Mitchell surprised some people who follow Iranian issues, given how long his appointment had been rumored. But officials said Mr. Ross was at the State Department on Monday.
Analysts said the timing for an American overture to Iran was better now than it had been for a long time.
“The Iranian regime is in a truly desperate situation,” said Abbas Milani, the director of Iranian studies at Stanford University. “The regime is in a much more amenable mood because the economy is in a shambles. They’re also dealing with someone whose name is Barack Hussein Obama.”
As for North Korea, Mrs. Clinton said the administration was committed to existing multilateral talks over its nuclear program. But she noted that in the past, there had been bilateral talks within the current six-nation arrangement. “We’re going to pursue steps that we think are effective,” she said.
On China, Mrs. Clinton said that the United States needed “a more comprehensive approach” and that the strategic dialogue of the Bush administration “turned into an economic dialogue.”
“The economy will always be a centerpiece of our relationship, but we want it to be part of a broader agenda,” Mrs. Clinton said. She did not specify what other issues the United States would put on the table.
Last week, Timothy F. Geithner, who was sworn in Monday as Treasury secretary, signaled a potentially more confrontational stance toward China, saying in written testimony to the Senate that China manipulated its currency.
During the Bush administration, the Treasury Department, particularly under Henry M. Paulson Jr., played a lead role in coordinating policy toward China. Mrs. Clinton has pushed for the State Department to increase its profile on economic affairs, which suggests a stronger role on China.
Mrs. Clinton declined to be drawn out on details about changes in policy toward Iran or another thorny challenge, Afghanistan. Both, she said, were the subject of policy reviews.
She also said little about Mr. Mitchell’s first mission, except to note that the United States was focused for now on talks between the Israelis and the Palestinians. She did not address Syria’s role.
Mrs. Clinton brushed off suggestions that the appointment of Mr. Mitchell and another emissary — Richard C. Holbrooke, who will be special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan — could lead to conflict or rivalries in policy making.
“Oh, no, no,” she said. “I think we have already established a collegial, effective working relationship.”
Gates says Iran bigger worry than Russia in Latin America
WASHINGTON - Defense Secretary Robert Gates says he is troubled by Iranian activities in Latin America that he sees as meddling. But he told a Senate panel Tuesday that Russian military outreach there doesn't bother him at all.
Iran has used the United States as a foil as it tries to establish ties with left-leaning Latin American leaders.
Gates didn't say just what he thinks Iran is up to militarily. But he called Iran a threat there that Russia, despite high-profile maneuvers, is not.
Gates shrugged off Russian naval tours in places like Venezuela. He said that if Russia hadn't raised alarms by invading Georgia last year, he would have invited Russian ships to dock in Miami as well.
He said the Russian sailors would have had more fun there than in Caracas.
Iran has used the United States as a foil as it tries to establish ties with left-leaning Latin American leaders.
Gates didn't say just what he thinks Iran is up to militarily. But he called Iran a threat there that Russia, despite high-profile maneuvers, is not.
Gates shrugged off Russian naval tours in places like Venezuela. He said that if Russia hadn't raised alarms by invading Georgia last year, he would have invited Russian ships to dock in Miami as well.
He said the Russian sailors would have had more fun there than in Caracas.
Ap Associated Press
Six Bahais, Christian arrested in Iran: judiciary
Iran has arrested six adherents of the banned Bahai faith and a Christian for alleged propaganda against the Islamic republic and insulting Islam, the judiciary spokesman said on Tuesday.
"These people were not arrested for their faith. The six Bahais are accused of insulting religious sanctities and the Christian citizen of propaganda against the system," Ali Reza Jamshidi told reporters.
He said the detainees' cases were under investigation, but did not reveal their identities or say when they had been arrested.
Jinous Sobhani, the former secretary of Nobel laureate Shirin Ebadi's rights group, is also accused of "propaganda against the system and acting against national security," Jamshidi said.
Fars news agency reported that Sobhani was arrested in mid-January for links with a Bahai organisation.
The Bahai faith was founded in Iran in 1863 but is not recognised by the government. Its followers are regarded as infidels and have suffered persecution both before and after the 1979 Islamic revolution
"These people were not arrested for their faith. The six Bahais are accused of insulting religious sanctities and the Christian citizen of propaganda against the system," Ali Reza Jamshidi told reporters.
He said the detainees' cases were under investigation, but did not reveal their identities or say when they had been arrested.
Jinous Sobhani, the former secretary of Nobel laureate Shirin Ebadi's rights group, is also accused of "propaganda against the system and acting against national security," Jamshidi said.
Fars news agency reported that Sobhani was arrested in mid-January for links with a Bahai organisation.
The Bahai faith was founded in Iran in 1863 but is not recognised by the government. Its followers are regarded as infidels and have suffered persecution both before and after the 1979 Islamic revolution
AFP
Iranian Regime says 12 policemen killed on Pakistani border
TEHRAN, Jan. 27 (Xinhua) -- Iran's judiciary spokesman, Ali Reza Jamshidi, said on Tuesday that 12 border policemen have been killed in an ambush by rebels on the Pakistani border.
"They (the policemen) were on a mission and they were trapped in the bandits' ambush and 12 of them were killed," Jamshidi said.
The rebels fled after the attack on Sunday in the town of Saravan, located in the southeast border area of Sistan-Baluchestan province, he added.
On Monday, Iran's Students news agency (ISNA) reported "A truck which was used to feeding the border outposts with their provisions was attacked by the rebels in an ambush in the zero bordering point of Iran and Pakistan, which led to the martyrdom of some of Iran's border policemen."
The report did not say how many Iranian policemen were killed in the ambush.
Quoting an unidentified police commander, the report said, "this wicked operation which means retaliation is due to the deadly blows that the rebels had received from the border police within the last few days.
"In case invited, Iran's police is ready to help the Pakistani police to encounter and eradicate the rebels, the international bandits and the smugglers inside Pakistani territory," the unnamed police commander was quoted as saying.
An Iranian Sunni rebel group based in southeastern Iran, the Jundullah (Soldiers of God), has constantly been blamed for offense and kidnappings in southeastern Iran at the border zone with Pakistan.
The group, which is the target of Iran's border police operation, killed 16 policemen it kidnapped in southeast Iran in June.
Iran's Drug Control Headquarters (DCH) announced in November that Iran would seal all the borders of the country within two years to control drugs smuggling.
Iran is located at the crossroad of international drug smuggling from Afghanistan and Pakistan, the world's top opium producer, to Europe.
"They (the policemen) were on a mission and they were trapped in the bandits' ambush and 12 of them were killed," Jamshidi said.
The rebels fled after the attack on Sunday in the town of Saravan, located in the southeast border area of Sistan-Baluchestan province, he added.
On Monday, Iran's Students news agency (ISNA) reported "A truck which was used to feeding the border outposts with their provisions was attacked by the rebels in an ambush in the zero bordering point of Iran and Pakistan, which led to the martyrdom of some of Iran's border policemen."
The report did not say how many Iranian policemen were killed in the ambush.
Quoting an unidentified police commander, the report said, "this wicked operation which means retaliation is due to the deadly blows that the rebels had received from the border police within the last few days.
"In case invited, Iran's police is ready to help the Pakistani police to encounter and eradicate the rebels, the international bandits and the smugglers inside Pakistani territory," the unnamed police commander was quoted as saying.
An Iranian Sunni rebel group based in southeastern Iran, the Jundullah (Soldiers of God), has constantly been blamed for offense and kidnappings in southeastern Iran at the border zone with Pakistan.
The group, which is the target of Iran's border police operation, killed 16 policemen it kidnapped in southeast Iran in June.
Iran's Drug Control Headquarters (DCH) announced in November that Iran would seal all the borders of the country within two years to control drugs smuggling.
Iran is located at the crossroad of international drug smuggling from Afghanistan and Pakistan, the world's top opium producer, to Europe.
Iran Press News
Holocaust a 'big lie': Iran govt spokesman
Iran's government spokesman on Tuesday branded the Holocaust a "big lie" created to place the Islamic republic's arch-foe Israel in the Middle East, the state IRNA news agency reported.
"The Holocaust is a concept coming from a big lie in order to settle a rootless regime in the heart of the Islamic world," Gholam Hossein Elham told a conference on Gaza in central Iran's religious city of Qom.
It was not the first time an Iranian official has questioned the massacre of Jews by Nazis in World War II.
Iran does not recognise Israel, and since his election in 2005 President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has attracted international condemnation by repeatedly predicting that the Jewish state is doomed to disappear.
In late 2005 Ahmadinejad branded the Holocaust a "myth." His comment was followed by a conference in Tehran in 2006 that brought together Holocaust deniers and revisionists.
A mass-circulation Iranian newspaper also staged a controversial cartoon competition on the subject.
In September last year a group of Iranian Islamist students unveiled a book mocking the Holocaust and filled with anti-Semitic stereotypes and revisionist arguments.
The United Nations designated January 27 as international Holocaust memorial day in 2005, marking the date Soviet troops liberated the largest Nazi death camp, Auschwitz-Birkenau, in Poland.
AFP
"The Holocaust is a concept coming from a big lie in order to settle a rootless regime in the heart of the Islamic world," Gholam Hossein Elham told a conference on Gaza in central Iran's religious city of Qom.
It was not the first time an Iranian official has questioned the massacre of Jews by Nazis in World War II.
Iran does not recognise Israel, and since his election in 2005 President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has attracted international condemnation by repeatedly predicting that the Jewish state is doomed to disappear.
In late 2005 Ahmadinejad branded the Holocaust a "myth." His comment was followed by a conference in Tehran in 2006 that brought together Holocaust deniers and revisionists.
A mass-circulation Iranian newspaper also staged a controversial cartoon competition on the subject.
In September last year a group of Iranian Islamist students unveiled a book mocking the Holocaust and filled with anti-Semitic stereotypes and revisionist arguments.
The United Nations designated January 27 as international Holocaust memorial day in 2005, marking the date Soviet troops liberated the largest Nazi death camp, Auschwitz-Birkenau, in Poland.
Clinton: Iranians must choose whether to cooperate
President Barack Obama's intent to change the direction of U.S. foreign policy gives Iran a "clear opportunity" to engage more productively on its nuclear program and other issues, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Tuesday.
In her first remarks to reporters at the State Department, Clinton said Obama's first days in office have made it clear that a more open Iranian approach to the international community could benefit Iran. She said this was reflected in statements Obama made in an interview Monday with an Arab TV network.
"There is a clear opportunity for the Iranians, as the president expressed in his interview, to demonstrate some willingness to engage meaningfully with the international community," she said. "Whether or not that hand becomes less clenched is really up to them."
Obama told the Al-Arabiya news channel that he wanted to communicate to Muslims that "the Americans are not your enemy." He condemned Iran's threats to destroy Israel and its pursuit of nuclear weapons, but said "it is important for us to be willing to talk to Iran, to express very clearly where our differences are, but where there are potential avenues for progress."
Clinton, who criticized Obama for his willingness to speak without conditions with leaders of rogue nations like Iran during their contest for the Democratic presidential nomination, told reporters that the administration is undertaking a wide-ranging and comprehensive survey of U.S. policy options toward Iran.
"There is just a lot that we are considering that I'm not prepared to discuss," she added.
Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Mehdi Safari, speaking in Athens, Greece, said Tuesday that it was too early to say whether relations with the United States would improve with Obama as president.
"We will wait and see (if there is) actual change or just slogans," he said.
Clinton's comments came one day after U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice said the Obama administration will engage in "direct diplomacy" with Iran. Not since before the 1979 Iranian revolution are U.S. officials believed to have conducted wide-ranging direct diplomacy with Iranian officials. Rice said Iran must meet U.N. Security Council demands to suspend uranium enrichment before any talks on its nuclear program.
More broadly, Clinton said her initial round of telephone calls with world leaders has yielded positive signs.
"There's a great exhalation of breath going on around the world as people express their appreciation for the new direction that's being set and the team that's (been) put together by the president," said the former New York senator and first lady.
"In areas of the world that have felt either overlooked or not receiving appropriate attention to the problems they are experiencing, there's a welcoming of the engagement that we are promising," she said. "It's not any kind of repudiation or indictment of the past eight years so much as an excitement and an acceptance of how we are going to be doing business."
She dismissed suggestions that Obama's foreign policy team will find it difficult to work together. She said all are determined to find the best way to execute the president's foreign policy objectives.
"We have a lot of damage to repair," she said, referring to U.S. foreign relations as they stood when President George W. Bush left office Jan. 20.
Clinton said she spoke by telephone Tuesday with top Iraqi officials to make clear that there will be continuity in U.S. policy.
She said her call was intended to "reinforce our commitment to a democratic and sovereign Iraq and the importance of their provincial elections." Iraqis are scheduled to vote on Saturday in a set of elections that U.S. and Iraqi officials hope will further solidify progress toward national political reconciliation.
In her first remarks to reporters at the State Department, Clinton said Obama's first days in office have made it clear that a more open Iranian approach to the international community could benefit Iran. She said this was reflected in statements Obama made in an interview Monday with an Arab TV network.
"There is a clear opportunity for the Iranians, as the president expressed in his interview, to demonstrate some willingness to engage meaningfully with the international community," she said. "Whether or not that hand becomes less clenched is really up to them."
Obama told the Al-Arabiya news channel that he wanted to communicate to Muslims that "the Americans are not your enemy." He condemned Iran's threats to destroy Israel and its pursuit of nuclear weapons, but said "it is important for us to be willing to talk to Iran, to express very clearly where our differences are, but where there are potential avenues for progress."
Clinton, who criticized Obama for his willingness to speak without conditions with leaders of rogue nations like Iran during their contest for the Democratic presidential nomination, told reporters that the administration is undertaking a wide-ranging and comprehensive survey of U.S. policy options toward Iran.
"There is just a lot that we are considering that I'm not prepared to discuss," she added.
Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Mehdi Safari, speaking in Athens, Greece, said Tuesday that it was too early to say whether relations with the United States would improve with Obama as president.
"We will wait and see (if there is) actual change or just slogans," he said.
Clinton's comments came one day after U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice said the Obama administration will engage in "direct diplomacy" with Iran. Not since before the 1979 Iranian revolution are U.S. officials believed to have conducted wide-ranging direct diplomacy with Iranian officials. Rice said Iran must meet U.N. Security Council demands to suspend uranium enrichment before any talks on its nuclear program.
More broadly, Clinton said her initial round of telephone calls with world leaders has yielded positive signs.
"There's a great exhalation of breath going on around the world as people express their appreciation for the new direction that's being set and the team that's (been) put together by the president," said the former New York senator and first lady.
"In areas of the world that have felt either overlooked or not receiving appropriate attention to the problems they are experiencing, there's a welcoming of the engagement that we are promising," she said. "It's not any kind of repudiation or indictment of the past eight years so much as an excitement and an acceptance of how we are going to be doing business."
She dismissed suggestions that Obama's foreign policy team will find it difficult to work together. She said all are determined to find the best way to execute the president's foreign policy objectives.
"We have a lot of damage to repair," she said, referring to U.S. foreign relations as they stood when President George W. Bush left office Jan. 20.
Clinton said she spoke by telephone Tuesday with top Iraqi officials to make clear that there will be continuity in U.S. policy.
She said her call was intended to "reinforce our commitment to a democratic and sovereign Iraq and the importance of their provincial elections." Iraqis are scheduled to vote on Saturday in a set of elections that U.S. and Iraqi officials hope will further solidify progress toward national political reconciliation.
Ap Associated press
Monday, January 26, 2009
Germany to Curb Trade With Iran on Criticism
Germany took measures to curb trade with Iran because of criticism from partners including the U.S. and Israel, Handelsblatt reported. Chancellor Angela Merkel asked Economy Minister Michael Glos to cease issuing guarantees for companies’ transactions with Iranian clients, the newspaper said, citing unidentified people close to industry and government. Exceptions will be made for “small” deals, Handelsblatt said. Germany, where exports to Iran rose last year, is trying to aid an eventual offer of talks between new U.S. President Barack Obama’s administration and the government of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the newspaper said without being more specific.
Bllomberg News
US favors “vigorous” diplomacy with Iran: envoy
The new United States ambassador to the United Nations said Monday that Washington was committed to direct, "vigorous" diplomacy with Iran over its suspect nuclear program but warned Tehran of increased pressure if it refuses to halt uranium enrichment. Susan Rice told reporters that President Barack Obama's administration looked forward to "engaging in vigorous diplomacy that includes direct diplomacy with Iran, as well as continued collaboration and partnership with" the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany."
"We will look at what is necessary and appropriate with respect to maintaining pressure toward that goal of ending Iran's nuclear program," she added following her meeting with U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon to present her credentials. "Dialogue and diplomacy must go hand in hand with a very firm message from the U.S. and the international community that Iran needs to meet its obligations as defined by the Security Council and its continued refusal to do so will only cause pressure to increase," Rice added. The five permanent members of the Security Council -- Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States -- plus Germany have offered Tehran a set of economic and energy incentives in exchange for suspending uranium enrichment program which the West sees as a cover for seeking to build nuclear weapons. But Tehran is pressing on with its sensitive nuclear fuel work, insisting that its nuclear program is peaceful and solely geared toward electricity generation. The Security Council has already adopted four resolutions -- three of which included sanctions -- requiring Iran to suspend uranium enrichment.
Alarabiya
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Iranians protest PMOI removal off EU terror list
Hundreds of Iranians rallied in front of the French embassy on Sunday to protest at the European Union's likely removal of Iran's exiled armed opposition from its list of terror groups. The demonstrators shouted "Death to (Nicolas) Sarkozy" and "Europe be ashamed, leave the hypocrites" -- a term Iran uses to describe its main opposition, the People's Mujahedeen of Iran (PMOI). The EU is expected to strike PMOI off its list of terror groups on Monday, ending a long legal battle. "Europeans must be aware of the consequences of such a decision in relations with Iran," said Mojtaba Keshani, a mid-ranking cleric addressing the crowd. Later on Sunday, the Iranian foreign ministry also lashed out at the EU.
"The record of the actions of hypocrites (PMOI) is very serious and if the EU decides to remove them from their list of terrorist groups, it will be considered a conscious political decision," Hassan Ghashghavi, a ministry spokesman, said in a statement to the semi-official agency Ilna. "The Iranian public is waiting to see if (the Europeans) will act in the case of hypocrites selectively and adopt an attitude of double standards or if they are serious in the fight against terrorism," he added. The Luxembourg-based Court of First Instance ruled last month that the EU had wrongly frozen the funds of the PMOI and violated its rights by not justifying why it was placed on the list. "The only outcome will be the worsening of ties between Iran and Europe," the cleric at the demonstration said, while acknowledging France's announcement that it had appealed against the ruling. Anti-riot police were deployed around the embassy in central Tehran and protesters also shouted "death to America" before calmly breaking off. A similar protest is expected to be held outside the British embassy on Monday, a demonstrator said. Formed in the 1960s in opposition to the rule of the U.S.-backed shah, the PMOI joined in the 1979 Islamic revolution but then took up arms against the new clerical regime. It killed several of Iran's new leaders in the first years after the revolution and backed the then Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein in the 1980-1988 war with Iran. But major attacks had ceased by the early 1990s. The group has since 2002 tried to have itself removed from the EU list of terror organizations which are subject to an EU-wide assets freeze. It is also designated by the U.S. government as a foreign terrorist organization.
"The record of the actions of hypocrites (PMOI) is very serious and if the EU decides to remove them from their list of terrorist groups, it will be considered a conscious political decision," Hassan Ghashghavi, a ministry spokesman, said in a statement to the semi-official agency Ilna. "The Iranian public is waiting to see if (the Europeans) will act in the case of hypocrites selectively and adopt an attitude of double standards or if they are serious in the fight against terrorism," he added. The Luxembourg-based Court of First Instance ruled last month that the EU had wrongly frozen the funds of the PMOI and violated its rights by not justifying why it was placed on the list. "The only outcome will be the worsening of ties between Iran and Europe," the cleric at the demonstration said, while acknowledging France's announcement that it had appealed against the ruling. Anti-riot police were deployed around the embassy in central Tehran and protesters also shouted "death to America" before calmly breaking off. A similar protest is expected to be held outside the British embassy on Monday, a demonstrator said. Formed in the 1960s in opposition to the rule of the U.S.-backed shah, the PMOI joined in the 1979 Islamic revolution but then took up arms against the new clerical regime. It killed several of Iran's new leaders in the first years after the revolution and backed the then Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein in the 1980-1988 war with Iran. But major attacks had ceased by the early 1990s. The group has since 2002 tried to have itself removed from the EU list of terror organizations which are subject to an EU-wide assets freeze. It is also designated by the U.S. government as a foreign terrorist organization.
Alarabiya
Mohammad Sadegh Kaboudvand Awarded Hellman/Hammett Grant
(New York) - Human Rights Watch today announced a Hellman/Hammett grant, awarded to persecuted writers, for the Iranian human rights activist Mohammad Sadegh Kaboudvand. He is serving a 10-year prison term in Iran for his writings and is in a critical medical condition in urgent need of care.
Each year, Human Rights Watch awards Hellman/Hammett grants to writers punished by their governments for expressing opposition views, criticizing government officials or actions, or writing about topics that the government does not want reported. A special emergency grant is awarded to writers who need to flee for their safety or need immediate medical treatment for injury caused by torture, assault or harsh prison conditions.
"Kaboudvand's work as a human rights defender and journalist promoting critically needed reform in Iran has landed him in prison with little access to urgently needed medical care," said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East and North Africa director at Human Rights Watch. "His experience is harsh testimony to the plight of journalists, dissidents and other peaceful critics in Iran today."
Kaboudvand is a prominent human rights defender, journalist, and founder in 2005 of a group that seeks to protect the rights of Iranian Kurds, the Human Rights Organization of Kurdistan (HROK). The group grew to include 200 local reporters throughout the Iranian Kurdish region, allowing it to provide detailed and timely reports from throughout the region, published in the now-banned newspaper Payam-e Mardom (Message of the People) for which Kaboudvand was the managing director and editor.
Through his human rights and journalism work, Kaboudvand was instrumental in creating a civil society network for Kurdish youth and activists. He is also the author of three books, Nimeh-ye Digar ("The Other Half," a book on women's rights), Barzakh-e Democracy ("The Stuggle for Democracy"), and Jonbesh-e Ejtemaii ("Social Movements").
Intelligence agents arrested Kaboudvand on July 1, 2007 and then searched his home and possessions, his lawyers said. The agents took him to ward 209 of Evin Prison, under the control of the Intelligence Ministry and used to detain political prisoners. They held him without charge in solitary confinement for nearly six months.
In May 2008, Branch 15 of the Revolutionary Court sentenced Kaboudvand to 10 years in prison for "acting against national security by establishing the Human Rights Organization of Kurdistan, widespread propaganda against the system by disseminating news, opposing Islamic penal laws by publicizing punishments such as stoning and executions, and advocating on behalf of political prisoners." In October 2008, Branch 54 of the Tehran Appeals Court upheld his sentence.
The Iranian government relies on these and other provisions of its "security laws" to imprison writers, intellectuals, and human rights defenders for expressing critical views, or for trying to meet peacefully. In 2008, Human Rights Watch issued a report about how Iran's security laws are used to clamp down on independent activism (http://www.hrw.org/en/reports/2008/01/06/you-can-detain-anyone-anything-0 ).
Kaboudvand's wife and three children last heard from him on December 16. On December 17, Kaboudvand, whose parents both died of heart attacks, suffered a heart attack in prison, said his lawyers. He had already been in fragile health because of a previous heart attack, high blood pressure, a kidney infection, and a prostate condition. According to his lawyers, the authorities have rejected requests from prison doctors to allow him access to specialists for medical care that is not available in the prison medical center.
Human Rights Watch called on the Iranian government to grant Kaboudvand the medical care he needs to treat his life-threatening conditions immediately and to end his unjust confinement. Human Rights Watch reiterated its calls on the government to repeal the vague and arbitrary provisions of its penal code used to silence critics and activists who seek to exercise their rights to free expression and assembly.
Human Rights Watch started the Hellman/Hammett program in 1990. Since then, it has awarded grants to more than 600 writers from 91 countries. It awards the grants every year after a selection committee composed of authors, editors, and journalists who have a longstanding interest in free expression issues review nominations.
Human Rights Watch
Each year, Human Rights Watch awards Hellman/Hammett grants to writers punished by their governments for expressing opposition views, criticizing government officials or actions, or writing about topics that the government does not want reported. A special emergency grant is awarded to writers who need to flee for their safety or need immediate medical treatment for injury caused by torture, assault or harsh prison conditions.
"Kaboudvand's work as a human rights defender and journalist promoting critically needed reform in Iran has landed him in prison with little access to urgently needed medical care," said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East and North Africa director at Human Rights Watch. "His experience is harsh testimony to the plight of journalists, dissidents and other peaceful critics in Iran today."
Kaboudvand is a prominent human rights defender, journalist, and founder in 2005 of a group that seeks to protect the rights of Iranian Kurds, the Human Rights Organization of Kurdistan (HROK). The group grew to include 200 local reporters throughout the Iranian Kurdish region, allowing it to provide detailed and timely reports from throughout the region, published in the now-banned newspaper Payam-e Mardom (Message of the People) for which Kaboudvand was the managing director and editor.
Through his human rights and journalism work, Kaboudvand was instrumental in creating a civil society network for Kurdish youth and activists. He is also the author of three books, Nimeh-ye Digar ("The Other Half," a book on women's rights), Barzakh-e Democracy ("The Stuggle for Democracy"), and Jonbesh-e Ejtemaii ("Social Movements").
Intelligence agents arrested Kaboudvand on July 1, 2007 and then searched his home and possessions, his lawyers said. The agents took him to ward 209 of Evin Prison, under the control of the Intelligence Ministry and used to detain political prisoners. They held him without charge in solitary confinement for nearly six months.
In May 2008, Branch 15 of the Revolutionary Court sentenced Kaboudvand to 10 years in prison for "acting against national security by establishing the Human Rights Organization of Kurdistan, widespread propaganda against the system by disseminating news, opposing Islamic penal laws by publicizing punishments such as stoning and executions, and advocating on behalf of political prisoners." In October 2008, Branch 54 of the Tehran Appeals Court upheld his sentence.
The Iranian government relies on these and other provisions of its "security laws" to imprison writers, intellectuals, and human rights defenders for expressing critical views, or for trying to meet peacefully. In 2008, Human Rights Watch issued a report about how Iran's security laws are used to clamp down on independent activism (http://www.hrw.org/en/reports/2008/01/06/you-can-detain-anyone-anything-0 ).
Kaboudvand's wife and three children last heard from him on December 16. On December 17, Kaboudvand, whose parents both died of heart attacks, suffered a heart attack in prison, said his lawyers. He had already been in fragile health because of a previous heart attack, high blood pressure, a kidney infection, and a prostate condition. According to his lawyers, the authorities have rejected requests from prison doctors to allow him access to specialists for medical care that is not available in the prison medical center.
Human Rights Watch called on the Iranian government to grant Kaboudvand the medical care he needs to treat his life-threatening conditions immediately and to end his unjust confinement. Human Rights Watch reiterated its calls on the government to repeal the vague and arbitrary provisions of its penal code used to silence critics and activists who seek to exercise their rights to free expression and assembly.
Human Rights Watch started the Hellman/Hammett program in 1990. Since then, it has awarded grants to more than 600 writers from 91 countries. It awards the grants every year after a selection committee composed of authors, editors, and journalists who have a longstanding interest in free expression issues review nominations.
Human Rights Watch
Uranium nations urged not to sell to Iran
LONDON (Reuters) - Western powers believe Iran is running short of raw uranium for its nuclear program and are urging producer nations not to sell to Tehran, The Times reported Saturday. The British newspaper said Britain's Foreign Office late last year ordered its diplomats in Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Brazil -- all major uranium producers -- to lobby their governments on the issue. "Countries including Britain, the U.S., France and Germany have started intensive diplomatic efforts to dissuade major uranium producers from selling to Iran," the newspaper said.The Western governments accuse Tehran of trying to acquire nuclear weapons under cover of a civilian nuclear energy program. Iran denies the accusation and says it only wants nuclear power in order to generate electricity.The enriched uranium required for use in nuclear reactors or weapons is produced in centrifuges that spin uranium hexafluoride gas (UF6) at high speeds. The UF6 is derived in a chemical reaction from "yellow cake," a concentrate obtained from mined uranium ore.The vice president of Kazakhstan's state atomic company told Reuters in an interview in November that the former Soviet republic planned to increase uranium production to nearly 12,000 tonnes this year from around 8,600 tonnes in 2008.The World Nuclear Association lists the top 10 uranium mining nations in 2007 as Canada, Australia, Kazakhstan, Russia, Niger, Namibia, Uzbekistan, the United States, Ukraine and China. Brazil was 13th.The Times said the Democratic Republic of Congo, where fighting and smuggling are rife, was another potential source of supply that troubles Western nations and the United Nations nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency.
The Washington Post
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Iran's First Lady Engages in International Politics!
Like all the Islamic Republic's first ladies, the wife of Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad has been something of a phantom, with very occasional public appearances and no discernible political role. Yet recently Azam al-Sadat Farahi has bucked that trend. She has publicly called on Egypt's first lady to use her influence to secure help for the people of Gaza. In a letter to Suzanne Mubarak, published by Iranian news agencies, Farahi wrote that "witnessing the dead bodies of women and children is painful and even worse is that some governments in Arab and Islamic countries do not support Gaza's oppressed people."She then adds: "You could ask your husband and his administration to prevent the intensification of the humanitarian catastrophe by opening the way for aiding Palestine's people."The move has surprised many Iranians and it has been widely discussed on Farsi forums and blogs. Here's a selection of comments from an Iranian news aggregator: One refers to Ahmadinejad's wife black chador: "the little bit of her nose that has not been covered by her chador looks beautiful."Another suggests that Egypt's first lady should reply: "She should write back to Ahmadinejad's wife and say 'behave like the wife of Imam Hassan did.' I think it was his eighth wife who killed him."One writes: "What do you expect from someone who sleeps next to Ahmadinejad?!"And another: "They give money for killing Mubarak, then they write a letter." (A group of radical Iranian students has offered a .5 million reward for the execution of Mubarak.)According to the Shahab news agency, Farahi sent her letter to Suzanne Mubarak about two weeks after Iran's former first lady, the wife of Mohammad Khatami, sent a letter to the wife of the king of Qatar calling on all governments and people to support the Palestinian people.Perhaps Khatami's wife has inspired the first lady? Or is this a public expression of a personal rivalry?Golnaz Esfandiari
January 22, 2009
January 22, 2009
Payvand
A possible minor offender among yesterday executions
Iran Human Rights, January 22: One of the 10 men executed in Tehran’s Evin prison yesterday, was a 21 years old man who was convicted of a murder 4 years ago, according to the government newspaper Iran.
According to the report, Molla Gol Hassan (21 years old, an Afghan citizen) was convicted of murdering Fakhreddin in December 2004, making Hassan 17 years old at that time.
If Hassan’s age and date of alleged offence is correctly stated by Iran newspaper, he was a minor at the time of committing the alleged offence, and he would be the first minor offender to be executed in 2009.
Iran Human Rights is investigating the facts about Molla Gol Hassan’s age at the time of the offence.
Iran has ratified UN’s convention of children’s right which bans death penalty for the offences committed at under 18 years of age.
However, at least 7 minor offenders were executed in Iran in 2008
According to the report, Molla Gol Hassan (21 years old, an Afghan citizen) was convicted of murdering Fakhreddin in December 2004, making Hassan 17 years old at that time.
If Hassan’s age and date of alleged offence is correctly stated by Iran newspaper, he was a minor at the time of committing the alleged offence, and he would be the first minor offender to be executed in 2009.
Iran Human Rights is investigating the facts about Molla Gol Hassan’s age at the time of the offence.
Iran has ratified UN’s convention of children’s right which bans death penalty for the offences committed at under 18 years of age.
However, at least 7 minor offenders were executed in Iran in 2008
Iran Press News
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Appeasement is a wrong policy
Until a few weeks ago, the general assumption in Washington was that the new Obama administration would take its time before seeking direct talks with Iran. The idea was that the US should wait until after Iran's presidential election in June. The prospect of the United States trying to appease Iran would be used by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as a vindication of his tough line and thus a boost to his chances of re-election.However, at last week's Senate hearing, the new US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made it clear that the Obama administration would not wait until after the Iranian presidential election. From Clinton's testimony it was clear that President Barack Obama wants to tackle the Iranian problem with utmost urgency.
With the exception of a few hardliners, the idea of appeasing the Islamic Republic through negotiations enjoys widespread support in the policymaking microcosm in Washington. This new wave of 'negotiationism', to coin a phrase, is based on a mixture of false assumptions and bad faith.
The first false assumption is that Iran launched its nuclear programme merely to gain a bargaining chip for future deals with the US and would switch it off once a process of reconciliation is in place. This was precisely the same assumption that the Europeans made in 2004 when President Mohammad Khatami ordered a suspension of uranium enrichment as a show of goodwill towards them. That decision was reversed by Ahmadinejad soon after he was sworn in, and uranium enrichment was resumed at a faster pace.
Since then, Ahmadinejad has elevated the nuclear programme to the level of a grand national strategy that would not be abandoned under any circumstances. There is a great deal of evidence that Ahmadinejad is no longer prepared even to consider the kind of concessions offered by Khatami.
- According to official estimates in Tehran, allocations for the nuclear programme have risen by almost 40 per cent.
- The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reports that all of Iran's known nuclear sites remain in full operation.
- The IAEA also reports that it has no access to a number of other industrial sites in Iran that may well be linked to the nuclear programme. In other words, we know what we don't know but don't know what we don't know.
The negotiationists forget that the European Union trio of Britain, Germany and France, have been negotiating with the Islamic Republic on this issue for almost a decade. During his term as British Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw visited Tehran more than any other capital outside Europe. Javier Solana, the EU's chief foreign policy official, has spent more time talking to envoys from Tehran than diplomats from any other nation. Tehran has also been engaged in negotiations with the five permanent members of the United Nations' Security Council plus Germany.
Not only do they ignore the history of negotiations with Tehran, the appeasers also refuse to state clearly what it is that should be negotiated. In other words, they put process in place of policy. Talking about what to do becomes a substitute for doing what needs to be done. Iran, of course, would love to talk to anybody for as long as it is not required to do anything it does not wish to do.
In the 1990s we termed the technique "the Shamir method" after the then Israeli Prime Minister Yitzak Shamir. Forced by the first Bush administration to enter peace talks with the Arabs, Shamir discovered one of the quirks of Western democracies: their pathological faith in negotiations. Western public opinion admires those who negotiate even though the process may lead to nothing tangible. Thus perceived, negotiations become a fascinating game both to play and to watch.
You would have to have talks about talks before proceeding to establish an agenda. Once this is done, you would still need weeks, if not months and years, of negotiating which item should be tackled in what order. At times, the negotiations break down. So, you will have to negotiate about resuming the process. To do that you would need a "road map", taking you from the point of breakdown to that of resumption. Needless to say you would need intermediaries, practising their talent at "shuttle diplomacy."
If things get out of control and you are forced to show something tangible, you might have to attach your initials to an interim agreement. This could be a long and vague document designed to obfuscate rather than clarify, a method of drowning the fish in water. To get cheers from the party of appeasement, you might have to make "goodwill gestures", a technique for dancing around the issue. The negotiationists do not say what it is that one should negotiate about with Ahmadinejad.
More than four years ago, the IAEA discovered that the Islamic Republic had been violating the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) for almost 18 years. Such a violation should have led to sanctions spelled out in the NPT itself. Instead, the IAEA decided to "negotiate" to prevent future violations. When those negotiations failed, the matter was taken to the UN Security Council which passed three resolutions demanding that Iran stop uranium enrichment.
The Islamic Republic has ignored those resolutions and repeatedly stated that it would never abide by them. In other words, Iran is ready to negotiate, provided the talks are about everything except the one thing that could be the object of credible negotiations.
The appeasers are indirectly calling on the UN Security Council to drop its one demand and enter into "unconditional negotiations" with the Islamic Republic. This means surrendering to Tehran, and may or may not be a good option.
Appeasers should shed their lexicon of obfuscation and admit that they are recommending unconditional surrender to Iran. Once they do that, they may have a stronger point. They would be able to say that, since the major democracies have no stomach for a fight with a "rogue regime", it is better to surrender to it in the hope that it moderates its temperament.
Amir Taheri is an Iranian writer, based in Europe
Gulf news
World powers to meet to discuss Iran next month
LONDON : Representatives of six major powers are expected to discuss Iran's nuclear program next month, their first meeting since the new U.S. administration took office, Russia's ambassador to Britain said on Wednesday.
"Political directors are scheduled to meet at the beginning of February in Berlin. That will be the first meeting this year. They will brainstorm the opportunities of further action with regard to this issue," Yuri Fedotov told reporters.
Western countries fear that Iran is seeking to develop nuclear weapons under the cover of a civilian atomic program. Iran says it only wants to master nuclear technology to generate electricity to meet its growing power needs.
The group of six countries -- Russia, the United States, China, Germany, Britain and France -- have obtained several rounds of U.N. sanctions against Tehran while pushing for further talks.
French daily Le Monde reported this week that France and Britain were spearheading an effort within the European Union to pass new sanctions, but with limited success.
New U.S. President Barack Obama has talked of incentives, as well as tougher sanctions if Tehran does not halt its nuclear work. He has said he is ready to deal directly with Iran, something his predecessor largely rejected.
A spokeswoman in the German Foreign Ministry said she could not confirm a date for a meeting, but said the six political directors had regular meetings to discuss the Iran issue
"Political directors are scheduled to meet at the beginning of February in Berlin. That will be the first meeting this year. They will brainstorm the opportunities of further action with regard to this issue," Yuri Fedotov told reporters.
Western countries fear that Iran is seeking to develop nuclear weapons under the cover of a civilian atomic program. Iran says it only wants to master nuclear technology to generate electricity to meet its growing power needs.
The group of six countries -- Russia, the United States, China, Germany, Britain and France -- have obtained several rounds of U.N. sanctions against Tehran while pushing for further talks.
French daily Le Monde reported this week that France and Britain were spearheading an effort within the European Union to pass new sanctions, but with limited success.
New U.S. President Barack Obama has talked of incentives, as well as tougher sanctions if Tehran does not halt its nuclear work. He has said he is ready to deal directly with Iran, something his predecessor largely rejected.
A spokeswoman in the German Foreign Ministry said she could not confirm a date for a meeting, but said the six political directors had regular meetings to discuss the Iran issue
Reuters
10 people were hanged in Tehran's Evin prison today, Jan. 21
Iran Human Rights, January 21: Ten men were hanged in Tehran’s Evin prison early this morning reported the Iranian state run enws agency ISCA news.
According to Fars news agency, execution of one man was postponed for one month, since the family of the man he was convicted of murdering, were not present. He watched hanging of the other 10 men before being taken to his cell, said the report.
According to a later report by ISCAnews, those executed today were identified as:
Mehdi (25), Firouz (27), Yadollah (33), Safar Ali (also named Kianoosh) (26), unidentified person convicted of murdering a man called Bakhtiyar, Behrooz (age not given, convicted of a murder in 1992), Majid (age not given), Arash (age not given), Safi (age not given), Wasim (age not given).
Iran Human Rights will come back with more details about today’s executions in Tehran.
Iran Press News
According to Fars news agency, execution of one man was postponed for one month, since the family of the man he was convicted of murdering, were not present. He watched hanging of the other 10 men before being taken to his cell, said the report.
According to a later report by ISCAnews, those executed today were identified as:
Mehdi (25), Firouz (27), Yadollah (33), Safar Ali (also named Kianoosh) (26), unidentified person convicted of murdering a man called Bakhtiyar, Behrooz (age not given, convicted of a murder in 1992), Majid (age not given), Arash (age not given), Safi (age not given), Wasim (age not given).
Iran Human Rights will come back with more details about today’s executions in Tehran.
Iran Press News
Mitsubishi unveils first mass-market electric car from a major car maker
Mitsubishi has unveiled the first mass-market electric car from a mainstream car maker.Slightly bigger than the Smart ForTwo but with a similar design, the i-MiEV — which goes on sale in the UK later this year — is based on the i, Mitsubishi's existing city car. With room for four adults, it has a top speed of 87mph and produces the equivalent of 57 horsepower. Its lithium-ion battery has a range of 100 miles and can be charged from flat to 80% in 20 minutes using Mitsubishi's bespoke high-powered charger; otherwise, a normal mains electricity socket will charge the battery from flat to full in six hours. Mitsubishi estimates that the car can travel 10,000 miles on £45 of electricity at current UK domestic prices.
Jim Tyrrell, managing director of Mitsubishi, said: "The i-MiEV is a great example of Mitsubishi's ability to innovate and bring the latest technology to market. We have a city car to suit real-world users with its ease of use, great environmental credentials and very low running costs."
Around 200 cars will be available in the UK at first, with final costs yet to be determined. A Mitsubishi spokesperson the cars might not be sold outright, but be leased at a cost of around £750 a month.
Kieren Puffett, editor of car website Parkers.co.uk who took the i-MiEV for a test drive today, said the car was ideal for urban areas. "Through the town, the car is particularly torquey, it can get away from traffic lights and across roundabouts really quite quickly. That's quite a nice benefit for town driving."
He added: "Because it's based on an existing city car, the characteristics are fairly familiar. If someone got in, I don't think they'd notice anything massively adrift."
Puffett had some reservations, however, about Mitsubishi's claims on the car's range. "I deliberately drove the car with headlights, heater and the radio on. I did about 50 minutes of driving and covered about 22 miles — and I discharged the battery to half way from full."
Robert Evans, chief executive of Cenex, a government-backed agency that is leading the introduction of low-carbon road transport to the UK, welcomed the i-MiEV. He said that momentum towards the increased electrification of transport had been building in the UK ever since the publication of a report by Julia King, vice chancellor of Aston University and a former director of advanced engineering at Rolls-Royce. Working with economist Nicholas Stern, King reviewed the vehicle and fuel technologies which could help to decarbonise road transport in the next 25 years. They identified electric cars as a major feature of the future of personal transport.
"If progress is to be maintained, the public needs to be convinced that electric vehicles are a practical proposition that are capable of fulfilling their transport needs," said Evans. "The UK launch of the Mitsubishi i-MiEV — capable of carrying four passengers and with a range of 100 miles — marks an important step in this process.''
Mitsubishi has been developing its electric vehicle technology since 1995, most notably producing in-wheel electric motors that were showcased in an all-electric Lancer Evolution rally car in 2005 though Tyrrell said that specific technology was some way from market yet. This allows each wheel to be driven independently by its own motor. "In-wheel technology lends itself very well to 4-wheel drive performance but is not cost-effective when considering mass-market applications."
Lance Bradley, sales director at Mitsubishi, said: "The i-MiEV is just one of Mitsubishi's environmental initiatives to be unveiled this year. In February, we will launch the Colt ClearTec which uses stop-start technology to radically reduce CO2 emissions. ClearTec technology will be rolled out across most vehicles in the Mitsubishi range within the next three years."
Tyrrell said that as car makers bring out their electric cars he and others were now waiting for a "clear strategic direction and financial support from central government" on ways to make electric cars more attractive to consumers. This could perhaps include giving local authorities clearer direction to start initiatives such as free parking or exemption from certain taxes for electric cars.
The Guardian
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Iran busts another CIA network
TEHRAN - Iran has broken up a CIA-backed network that sought to carry out a “soft revolution” in Iran through people-to-people contacts.
The “soft revolution” plan is based in Dubai and is similar to a U.S. plan that targeted the Soviet Union in 1959, the director of the counterespionage department of the Intelligence Ministry told reporters at a press conference here on Monday. He said the CIA was seeking to implement the plan under the cover of scientific and cultural contacts between Iranian and U.S. nationals. Unfortunately, some Iranian nationals, especially cultural and scientific figures, were deceived through such activities, he added. “The U.S. intelligence agency was seeking to (repeat) its experiences of color revolutions through such public contacts with influential persons and elites.” The CIA tried to attain its goals by taking advantage of people-to-people contacts, joint studies, efforts to share scientific experiences, and other similar projects, he added. The soft revolution plan was carried out through “NGOs, union protests, non-violent demonstrations, civil disobedience… and (efforts to) foment ethnic strife” all across Iran, the official stated. Four of the people who led the network inside Iran were actively and intentionally cooperating with CIA agents, he noted. These four persons were put on trial, some others were pardoned, and some others were acquitted due to lack of sufficient evidence, he explained. These four persons confessed and videotapes of parts of their confessions will be released soon, he noted. He only named two of the persons, the brothers Dr. Arash Alaei and Dr. Kamyar Alaei. The Intelligence Ministry official said that $32 million of the $75 million allocated by the U.S. Congress to destabilize Iran was spent on this project. The CIA used institutions such as the Woodrow Wilson Foundation, the Soros Foundation, AIPAC, and charity organizations and sought the help of William Burns and other people in the United States and agents in the Azerbaijan Republic, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, and Kuwait. He stated that the CIA enlisted scientists, physicians, university professors, clergymen, artists, athletes, and dress designers for its plot. He went on to say that these people were invited to the United States in groups of 10-15 people, with visas issued for them in Dubai in the shortest possible time, and according to their professions, they participated in scientific seminars and toured various states, and when they returned home they were asked to write “analyses” of the situation inside Iran. The CIA was actively seeking to recruit more people for the network, who also would have been invited to visit the United States, he added. These persons were ordered to put pressure on the government to change its policy and to sow discord between the government and the people, he explained. The Intelligence Ministry found out about the secret plan from the very beginning and “even allowed the operation to be conducted to a (certain level) so that we could inform talented people with full confidence that they should not be deceived by such scientific centers,” he stated. The Iranian Intelligence Ministry countered the plot by “infiltrating” the network and even derailed it from its path by providing false information, but the CIA eventually discovered the ruse, he explained.
The “soft revolution” plan is based in Dubai and is similar to a U.S. plan that targeted the Soviet Union in 1959, the director of the counterespionage department of the Intelligence Ministry told reporters at a press conference here on Monday. He said the CIA was seeking to implement the plan under the cover of scientific and cultural contacts between Iranian and U.S. nationals. Unfortunately, some Iranian nationals, especially cultural and scientific figures, were deceived through such activities, he added. “The U.S. intelligence agency was seeking to (repeat) its experiences of color revolutions through such public contacts with influential persons and elites.” The CIA tried to attain its goals by taking advantage of people-to-people contacts, joint studies, efforts to share scientific experiences, and other similar projects, he added. The soft revolution plan was carried out through “NGOs, union protests, non-violent demonstrations, civil disobedience… and (efforts to) foment ethnic strife” all across Iran, the official stated. Four of the people who led the network inside Iran were actively and intentionally cooperating with CIA agents, he noted. These four persons were put on trial, some others were pardoned, and some others were acquitted due to lack of sufficient evidence, he explained. These four persons confessed and videotapes of parts of their confessions will be released soon, he noted. He only named two of the persons, the brothers Dr. Arash Alaei and Dr. Kamyar Alaei. The Intelligence Ministry official said that $32 million of the $75 million allocated by the U.S. Congress to destabilize Iran was spent on this project. The CIA used institutions such as the Woodrow Wilson Foundation, the Soros Foundation, AIPAC, and charity organizations and sought the help of William Burns and other people in the United States and agents in the Azerbaijan Republic, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, and Kuwait. He stated that the CIA enlisted scientists, physicians, university professors, clergymen, artists, athletes, and dress designers for its plot. He went on to say that these people were invited to the United States in groups of 10-15 people, with visas issued for them in Dubai in the shortest possible time, and according to their professions, they participated in scientific seminars and toured various states, and when they returned home they were asked to write “analyses” of the situation inside Iran. The CIA was actively seeking to recruit more people for the network, who also would have been invited to visit the United States, he added. These persons were ordered to put pressure on the government to change its policy and to sow discord between the government and the people, he explained. The Intelligence Ministry found out about the secret plan from the very beginning and “even allowed the operation to be conducted to a (certain level) so that we could inform talented people with full confidence that they should not be deceived by such scientific centers,” he stated. The Iranian Intelligence Ministry countered the plot by “infiltrating” the network and even derailed it from its path by providing false information, but the CIA eventually discovered the ruse, he explained.
------ Advice for Obama The official advised the incoming U.S. administration to avoid repeating the previous “failed” policies toward Iran. He made the remarks one day before Barack Obama is officially inaugurated as the next U.S. president. The Intelligence Ministry official said the U.S. is discrediting its scientific and charity organizations by allowing the CIA to use them as cover for its activities. “It is not in the interests of scientific and political institutions (to allow themselves) to be used by the CIA for its hidden agenda.” Employing such organizations to conduct spy activities will create skepticism about them that will be very difficult to eliminate, he noted.
Iranian Regime News Agency Tehran Times
Obama sworn in as first black U.S. president
WASHINGTON - Barack Obama was sworn in on Tuesday as the first black U.S. president, taking power to lead anxious Americans through a severe economic recession and two wars aboard.
Obama's historic moment arrives
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A deafening roar erupted among the crowd of hundreds of thousands as President-elect Barack Obama was introduced at the Capitol before his swearing-in Tuesday.Obama, who will be sworn in using the same Bible that was used in Abraham Lincoln's inauguration, greeted congressional leaders on a stage stretching across the front of the Capitol. He gave Rep. John Lewis, D-Georgia, a hug after being introduced.
Saddleback Church founder Rick Warren delivered the invocation, calling for the nation to put its differences aside, and applauding what he called "a hinge-point in history."
"We know today that [the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.] and a great cloud of witnesses are shouting in heaven," he said in his prayer.
Aretha Franlkin sang "My Country 'Tis of Thee" following the prayer.
After winning the presidency on a message of hope, Obama will deliver a sober inaugural address that lays out the problems facing the country, Obama aides said.
"The speech balances a very serious and sober tone with a dose of hope and inspiration that we can get through this," said one presidential transition aide, who outlined the address on the condition of anonymity.
Hundreds of thousands of people were on the National Mall -- dancing, singing and vigorously shaking flags -- in anticipation of Tuesday's swearing-in of Obama as the nation's 44th president.
"This is America happening," said Evadey Minott of Brooklyn, New York. "It was prophesized by King that we would have a day when everyone would come together. This is that day. I am excited. I am joyful. It brings tears to my eyes."
Minott was at Lafayette Square near the White House, where Obama and his wife, Michelle, had coffee with President Bush and first lady Laura Bush before heading to Capitol Hill.
Obama arrived at the Capitol, and cheers erupted as his image appeared on large television screens lined up on the Mall.
The Obamas attended a prayer service earlier at St. John's Episcopal Church to kick off the day of events surrounding Obama's inauguration. Watch the Bushes greet the Obamas »
As many as 2 million people are expected to crowd into the area between the Capitol, the White House and the Lincoln Memorial as Obama takes the oath of office at noon ET.
Gerrard Coles of Norwalk, Connecticut, had staked out a position in front of St. John's.
"Everyone's down here -- hopefully to catch a glimpse of Barack, just for a split second," he said. "I think this was a beautiful thing. It's something I always wanted to do. It's not every day that you get to be a part of history. Rather than just watch it on TV, you actually get to partake in it and you have a story to tell your kids."
Nine-year-old Laura Bruggerman also hoped to catch a glimpse of the soon-to-be president. She waited with her mother, Wendy, and father, Jeff, of Bethesda, Maryland, amid an affable crowd that tried to let shorter onlookers and children to the front for better views.
"I want to see Obama. I think that would be really cool. I could tell all of my friends that I got to see him," the youngster said.
Some spectators will be more than a mile from the swearing-in ceremony, watching on giant TV screens erected along the National Mall.The historic event has drawn myriad celebrities and politicians, including actors Dustin Hoffman and Denzel Washington, director Steven Spielberg and former vice presidents Dan Quayle, Al Gore and Walter Mondale.
Former Presidents Clinton, Carter and George H.W. Bush also were in attendance. Clinton and Bush shared an embrace.
Oprah Winfrey and actor Samuel L. Jackson sat on the same row. Winfrey hugged Senate hopeful Caroline Kennedy and later said of the inauguration, "It's behind the dream. We're just here feeling it with the throngs of people. It's amazing grace personified."
Thousands arrived before daylight Tuesday in standing-room-only trains. They carried blankets and wore Obama scarves to ward off the wind chills of minus 15 degrees Fahrenheit.
Suburban Washington train stations were jammed. A four-story parking deck at the Springfield, Virginia, station was filled at 5 a.m. Trains rolling into the stop about 15 miles south of the Capitol had no room for the hundreds on the platform.
The Metro rail system's Red Line was shut down about 9 a.m. after a pedestrian was hit by a train, further snarling the already overloaded train service, fire officials said.
On Monday night, visitors wandered around the Mall, snapping pictures and shooting video of the Capitol and monuments.
The scene around Lafayette Square was almost chaotic, with cars turning around in the street as they were confronted with barriers to closed-off areas and clots of pedestrians crossing streets against the light.
The visitors' excitement rubbed off on some of the jaded locals, one of whom said D.C. residents were "cynical of government."
"The energy on the streets is something I've never seen before," said Nancy Wigal, a 45-year-old technical writer who lives in the Mount Vernon Square area. "People are walking lighter, standing taller and are reaching out to one another. It feels like hope. It feels like shared happiness."
The morning began at 4 a.m. for many as those without tickets made a land grab on the Mall, rushing to stake out positions for the ceremony.
After Obama and Vice President-elect Joe Biden take their oaths of office on the western front of the Capitol, Obama will deliver his inaugural address, which Obama aides say will emphasize that America is entering a new era of responsibility.
In the approximately 20-minute speech, Obama will say America has been hurt by a "me-first" mentality that contributed to the current economic crisis, aides say, and he will call on individuals -- as well as corporations and businesses -- to take responsibility for their actions.After a formal farewell to President George W. Bush and lunch with congressional leaders, Obama will head up Pennsylvania Avenue to the White House, where he and his family will watch the inauguration parade from a reviewing stand. The parade begins at 3:45 p.m. ET. Watch the final preparations for Inauguration Day »
The new president and first lady will then close the night by attending 10 official inaugural balls.
Officials say they really don't know how many will show up, but estimates range from 1 million to 2 million.
Organizers have said about 280,000 people can fit into the secure zones around the Capitol and roughly 300,000 into the area around the parade. A mere 28,000 seats are available on Capitol grounds. Watch how Washington has become the "it" place »
Those with tickets to the inauguration will undergo tight screening, including passing through magnetometers, when they enter the seating area in front of the Capitol.
Spectators without tickets will be routed to the Mall, which for the first time will be open from end to end for an inauguration. Security there will be less stringent.
Jeri Pickett of Rochester, New York, was one of the few who got a ticket.
"I'd just like to see the inspiration of America," said Pickett, when asked what he was expecting from Inauguration Day. "There's so much warmth here now, and excitement -- rejuvenation."
Transportation officials say they will run subway trains on rush-hour schedules starting at 4 a.m. as well as extra buses. The Metro expects more than 1 million riders.
Inauguration events have already drawn record crowds. A crowd attending an inauguration concert Sunday was estimated between 300,000 and 400,000 and stretched from the Lincoln Memorial all the way to the Washington Monument, which stands at the midpoint of the Mall. Watch iReporter who lives near the Mall describe the atmosphere »
While Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan said Monday there was "no credible threat" to the inauguration events, a security cordon has been put in place around the city's core, turning much of downtown Washington into a pedestrian-only zone.
In addition to Secret Service, the security effort will involve 8,000 police officers from the District of Columbia and other jurisdictions, 10,000 National Guard troops, about 1,000 FBI personnel, and hundreds of others from the Department of Homeland Security, the National Park Service and U.S. Capitol Police.
Another 20,000 members of the National Guard are ready to respond if there is an emergency, according to outgoing Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff
Saddleback Church founder Rick Warren delivered the invocation, calling for the nation to put its differences aside, and applauding what he called "a hinge-point in history."
"We know today that [the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.] and a great cloud of witnesses are shouting in heaven," he said in his prayer.
Aretha Franlkin sang "My Country 'Tis of Thee" following the prayer.
After winning the presidency on a message of hope, Obama will deliver a sober inaugural address that lays out the problems facing the country, Obama aides said.
"The speech balances a very serious and sober tone with a dose of hope and inspiration that we can get through this," said one presidential transition aide, who outlined the address on the condition of anonymity.
Hundreds of thousands of people were on the National Mall -- dancing, singing and vigorously shaking flags -- in anticipation of Tuesday's swearing-in of Obama as the nation's 44th president.
"This is America happening," said Evadey Minott of Brooklyn, New York. "It was prophesized by King that we would have a day when everyone would come together. This is that day. I am excited. I am joyful. It brings tears to my eyes."
Minott was at Lafayette Square near the White House, where Obama and his wife, Michelle, had coffee with President Bush and first lady Laura Bush before heading to Capitol Hill.
Obama arrived at the Capitol, and cheers erupted as his image appeared on large television screens lined up on the Mall.
The Obamas attended a prayer service earlier at St. John's Episcopal Church to kick off the day of events surrounding Obama's inauguration. Watch the Bushes greet the Obamas »
As many as 2 million people are expected to crowd into the area between the Capitol, the White House and the Lincoln Memorial as Obama takes the oath of office at noon ET.
Gerrard Coles of Norwalk, Connecticut, had staked out a position in front of St. John's.
"Everyone's down here -- hopefully to catch a glimpse of Barack, just for a split second," he said. "I think this was a beautiful thing. It's something I always wanted to do. It's not every day that you get to be a part of history. Rather than just watch it on TV, you actually get to partake in it and you have a story to tell your kids."
Nine-year-old Laura Bruggerman also hoped to catch a glimpse of the soon-to-be president. She waited with her mother, Wendy, and father, Jeff, of Bethesda, Maryland, amid an affable crowd that tried to let shorter onlookers and children to the front for better views.
"I want to see Obama. I think that would be really cool. I could tell all of my friends that I got to see him," the youngster said.
Some spectators will be more than a mile from the swearing-in ceremony, watching on giant TV screens erected along the National Mall.The historic event has drawn myriad celebrities and politicians, including actors Dustin Hoffman and Denzel Washington, director Steven Spielberg and former vice presidents Dan Quayle, Al Gore and Walter Mondale.
Former Presidents Clinton, Carter and George H.W. Bush also were in attendance. Clinton and Bush shared an embrace.
Oprah Winfrey and actor Samuel L. Jackson sat on the same row. Winfrey hugged Senate hopeful Caroline Kennedy and later said of the inauguration, "It's behind the dream. We're just here feeling it with the throngs of people. It's amazing grace personified."
Thousands arrived before daylight Tuesday in standing-room-only trains. They carried blankets and wore Obama scarves to ward off the wind chills of minus 15 degrees Fahrenheit.
Suburban Washington train stations were jammed. A four-story parking deck at the Springfield, Virginia, station was filled at 5 a.m. Trains rolling into the stop about 15 miles south of the Capitol had no room for the hundreds on the platform.
The Metro rail system's Red Line was shut down about 9 a.m. after a pedestrian was hit by a train, further snarling the already overloaded train service, fire officials said.
On Monday night, visitors wandered around the Mall, snapping pictures and shooting video of the Capitol and monuments.
The scene around Lafayette Square was almost chaotic, with cars turning around in the street as they were confronted with barriers to closed-off areas and clots of pedestrians crossing streets against the light.
The visitors' excitement rubbed off on some of the jaded locals, one of whom said D.C. residents were "cynical of government."
"The energy on the streets is something I've never seen before," said Nancy Wigal, a 45-year-old technical writer who lives in the Mount Vernon Square area. "People are walking lighter, standing taller and are reaching out to one another. It feels like hope. It feels like shared happiness."
The morning began at 4 a.m. for many as those without tickets made a land grab on the Mall, rushing to stake out positions for the ceremony.
After Obama and Vice President-elect Joe Biden take their oaths of office on the western front of the Capitol, Obama will deliver his inaugural address, which Obama aides say will emphasize that America is entering a new era of responsibility.
In the approximately 20-minute speech, Obama will say America has been hurt by a "me-first" mentality that contributed to the current economic crisis, aides say, and he will call on individuals -- as well as corporations and businesses -- to take responsibility for their actions.After a formal farewell to President George W. Bush and lunch with congressional leaders, Obama will head up Pennsylvania Avenue to the White House, where he and his family will watch the inauguration parade from a reviewing stand. The parade begins at 3:45 p.m. ET. Watch the final preparations for Inauguration Day »
The new president and first lady will then close the night by attending 10 official inaugural balls.
Officials say they really don't know how many will show up, but estimates range from 1 million to 2 million.
Organizers have said about 280,000 people can fit into the secure zones around the Capitol and roughly 300,000 into the area around the parade. A mere 28,000 seats are available on Capitol grounds. Watch how Washington has become the "it" place »
Those with tickets to the inauguration will undergo tight screening, including passing through magnetometers, when they enter the seating area in front of the Capitol.
Spectators without tickets will be routed to the Mall, which for the first time will be open from end to end for an inauguration. Security there will be less stringent.
Jeri Pickett of Rochester, New York, was one of the few who got a ticket.
"I'd just like to see the inspiration of America," said Pickett, when asked what he was expecting from Inauguration Day. "There's so much warmth here now, and excitement -- rejuvenation."
Transportation officials say they will run subway trains on rush-hour schedules starting at 4 a.m. as well as extra buses. The Metro expects more than 1 million riders.
Inauguration events have already drawn record crowds. A crowd attending an inauguration concert Sunday was estimated between 300,000 and 400,000 and stretched from the Lincoln Memorial all the way to the Washington Monument, which stands at the midpoint of the Mall. Watch iReporter who lives near the Mall describe the atmosphere »
While Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan said Monday there was "no credible threat" to the inauguration events, a security cordon has been put in place around the city's core, turning much of downtown Washington into a pedestrian-only zone.
In addition to Secret Service, the security effort will involve 8,000 police officers from the District of Columbia and other jurisdictions, 10,000 National Guard troops, about 1,000 FBI personnel, and hundreds of others from the Department of Homeland Security, the National Park Service and U.S. Capitol Police.
Another 20,000 members of the National Guard are ready to respond if there is an emergency, according to outgoing Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff
CNN
Crowds pack frigid Mall for Obama's inauguration
WASHINGTON – Braving frigid temperatures, an exuberant crowd of hundreds of thousands packed the National Mall on Tuesday to celebrate the inauguration of Barack Hussein Obama as America's first black president. He grasps the reins of power in a high-noon ceremony amid grave economic worries and high expectations.It was the first change of administrations since the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Crowds filled the National Mall from the Lincoln Memorial to the U.S. Capitol for a glimpse of the proceedings and, in the words of many, simply "to be here." Washington's subway system was jammed and two downtown stations were closed when a woman was struck by a subway train.
Two years after beginning his improbable quest as a little-known, first-term Illinois senator with a foreign-sounding name, Obama moves into the Oval Office as the nation's fourth youngest president, at 47, and the first African-American, a barrier-breaking achievement believed impossible by generations of minorities.
Around the world, Obama's election electrified millions with the hope that America will be more embracing, more open to change.
The dawn of the new Democratic era — with Obama allies in charge of both houses of Congress — ends eight years of Republican control of the White House by George W. Bush. He leaves Washington as one of the nation's most unpopular and divisive presidents, the architect of two unfinished wars and the man in charge at a time of economic calamity that swept away many Americans' jobs, savings and homes.
Bush — following tradition — left a note for Obama in the top drawer of his desk in the Oval Office.
White House press secretary Dana Perino said the theme of the message — which Bush wrote on Monday — was similar to what he has said since election night: that Obama is about to begin a "fabulous new chapter" in the United States, and that he wishes him well.
The unfinished business of the Bush administration thrusts an enormous burden onto the new administration, though polls show Americans are confident Obama is on track to succeed. He has cautioned that improvements will take time and that things will get worse before they get better.
Culminating four days of celebration, the nation's 56th inauguration day began for Obama and Vice President-elect Joe Biden with a traditional morning worship service at St. John's Episcopal Church, across Lafayette Park from the White House. Bells pealed from the historic church's tower as Obama and his wife, Michelle, arrived five minutes behind schedule.
The festivities won't end until well after midnight, with dancing and partying at 10 inaugural balls.
By custom, Obama and his wife, and Biden and his wife, Jill, went directly from church to the White House for coffee with Bush and his wife, Laura. Michelle Obama brought a gift for the outgoing first lady in a white box decorated with a red ribbon.
Shortly before 11 a.m., Obama and Bush climbed into a heavily armored Cadillac limousine to share a ride to the Capitol for the transfer of power, an event flashed around the world in television and radio broadcasts, podcasts and Internet streaming. On Monday, Vice President Dick Cheney pulled a muscle in his back, leaving him in a wheelchair for the inauguration.
Just before noon, Obama steps forward on the West Front of the Capitol to lay his left hand on the same Bible that President Abraham Lincoln used at his first inauguration in 1861. The 35-word oath of office, administered by Chief Justice John Roberts, has been uttered by every president since George Washington. Obama was one of 22 Democratic senators to vote against Roberts' confirmation to the Supreme Court in 2005.
The son of a white, Kansas-born mother and a black, Kenya-born father, Obama decided to use his full name in the swearing-in ceremony.
The Constitution says the clock — not the pomp, ceremony and oaths — signals the transfer of the office from the old president to the new one.
The 20th Amendment to the Constitution specifies that the terms of office of the president and vice president "shall end at noon on the 20th day of January ... and the terms of their successors shall then begin."
To the dismay of liberals, Obama invited conservative evangelical pastor Rick Warren — an opponent of gay rights — to give the inaugural invocation.
About a dozen members of Obama's Cabinet and top appointees were ready for Senate confirmation Tuesday, provided no objections were raised. But Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas indicated he would block a move to immediately confirm Secretary of State-designate Hillary Rodham Clinton. Still, she is expected to be approved in a roll call vote Wednesday.
More than 10,000 people from all 50 states — including bands and military units — were assembled to follow Obama and Biden from the Capitol on the 1.5-mile inaugural parade route on Pennsylvania Avenue, concluding at a bulletproof reviewing stand in front of the White House. Security was unprecedented. Most bridges into Washington and about 3.5 square miles of downtown were closed.
Among the VIPs at the Capitol was pilot Chesley "Sully" Sullenberger, the hero of last week's US Airways crash into the Hudson River. All the media-shy Sullenberger would say is "I'm not allowed to say anything." Boxing legend Muhammad Ali was on the inaugural platform along with Hollywood celebrities.
Obama's inauguration represents a time of renewal and optimism for a nation gripped by fear and anxiety. Stark numbers tell the story of an economic debacle unrivaled since the 1930s:
_Eleven million people have lost their jobs, pushing the unemployment rate to 7.2 percent, a 16-year high.
_One in 10 U.S. homeowners is delinquent on mortgage payments or in arrears.
_The Dow Jones industrial average fell by 33.8 percent in 2008, the worst decline since 1931, and stocks lost $10 trillion in value between October 2007 and November 2008.
Obama and congressional Democrats are working on an $825 billion economic recovery bill that would provide an enormous infusion of public spending and tax cuts. Obama also will have at his disposal the remaining $350 billion in the federal financial bailout fund. His goal is to save or create 3 million jobs and put banks back in the job of lending to customers.
In an appeal for bipartisanship, Obama honored defeated Republican presidential rival John McCain at a dinner Monday night. "There are few Americans who understand this need for common purpose and common effort better than John McCain," Obama said.
Young and untested, Obama is a man of enormous confidence and electrifying oratorical skills. Hopes for Obama are extremely high, suggesting that Americans are willing to give him a long honeymoon to strengthen the economy and lift the financial gloom.
On Wednesday, his first working day in office, Obama is expected to redeem his campaign promise to begin the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq under a 16-month timetable. Aides said he would summon the Joint Chiefs of Staff to the Oval Office and order that the pullout commence.
___
Associated Press Writers Alan Fram, Donna Cassata, Gillian Gaynair, Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, Kevin Freking, Ed Tobias, Ben Evans, Seth Borenstein and H. Josef Hebert contributed to this report
Associated Press Writers Alan Fram, Donna Cassata, Gillian Gaynair, Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, Kevin Freking, Ed Tobias, Ben Evans, Seth Borenstein and H. Josef Hebert contributed to this report
Ap Associated Press
Global Peace by All Means
In view of the uncontroversial fact that Modern Warfare counts on High-Tech fuel-pollutant aircraft, exploding Depleted Uranium, and all other kinds of bombs, destructive of the Ozone Layer - the planet's only protective shield from ultra-violet radiation, we demand that all official governments of the world cease from warmongering and put immediate end to all wars globally, for the sake of Life on Earth, let alone the life of individual human beings.Global Peace by All Means
IBM Faces Complaint in EU on Software
A small Florida maker of mainframe computers says it will file Tuesday an antitrust complaint against International Business Machines Corp. in Europe, alleging that the high-tech giant boxed it out of the market by refusing to sell its customers the operating software to run its machinesThe complaint, which asks European Union regulators to bring an investigation, would extend a legal battle continuing in the U.S. and put further focus on Europe's scrutiny of big business. EU regulators used similar legal principles in charges made against Microsoft Corp. last week. Microsoft has said it is studying the charges and committed to "full compliance" with European law.
T3 Technologies Inc., of Tampa, Fla., had $10 million to $20 million in annual sales until 2006, says its president, Steven Friedman. Then, he says, late that year IBM stopped licensing technology to a key T3 supplier, and stopped selling operating-software licenses to T3 customers. His sales collapsed.
IBM declined to comment.
Mainframes are the workhorses of the computer world -- made for managing complex jobs such as credit-card transactions. They were once made by dozens of companies including Amdahl Corp., Control Data Corp., Digital Equipment Corp., Honeywell and NCR Corp. Now IBM sells the vast majority of them.
T3 is one of the last survivors. It builds machines using off-the-shelf components fitted with "emulators" to make software believe it is running on an IBM mainframe. Mr. Friedman says T3's machines can do the job cheaper than IBM's.
A key element of T3's complaint is the concept of "tying" -- T3 says IBM won't sell mainframe software separately from its own hardware. For a potential mainframe purchaser "there is only one company you can go to, and that is IBM," Mr. Friedman says.
EU antitrust officials last week charged Microsoft with anticompetitive behavior, alleging that the company harmed competition in the Web browser market by tying Internet Explorer to its Windows operating system.
T3 may face an uphill battle convincing regulators that they should require IBM to license its software to T3's customers. Such a compulsory license faces a high burden in EU case law. What's more, potential customers have plenty of choices for computing beyond the mainframe.
T3 has also tangled with IBM in U.S. federal court. In an ongoing case, IBM has alleged patent infringement against T3, which has accused IBM of antitrust abuses.
That case stems from a legal scuffle between IBM and an emulator maker, Platform Solutions Inc. T3 joined that case on Platform Solutions' side because it used the company's technology. Platform Solutions had also complained to the EU about IBM, along similar lines as T3. But IBM bought Platform Solutions last year, putting an end to its EU complaint.
EU regulators examine complaints from private parties, but they aren't obligated to bring cases.
An EU spokesman, Jonathan Todd, declined to comment on T3's expected filing. Mr. Todd said that though Platform Solutions withdrew its complaint against IBM, the EU has "continued to look at the sector on our own initiative."
IBM's mainframe marketing was under U.S. judicial oversight for decades, following a 1956 consent decree.
T3 Technologies Inc., of Tampa, Fla., had $10 million to $20 million in annual sales until 2006, says its president, Steven Friedman. Then, he says, late that year IBM stopped licensing technology to a key T3 supplier, and stopped selling operating-software licenses to T3 customers. His sales collapsed.
IBM declined to comment.
Mainframes are the workhorses of the computer world -- made for managing complex jobs such as credit-card transactions. They were once made by dozens of companies including Amdahl Corp., Control Data Corp., Digital Equipment Corp., Honeywell and NCR Corp. Now IBM sells the vast majority of them.
T3 is one of the last survivors. It builds machines using off-the-shelf components fitted with "emulators" to make software believe it is running on an IBM mainframe. Mr. Friedman says T3's machines can do the job cheaper than IBM's.
A key element of T3's complaint is the concept of "tying" -- T3 says IBM won't sell mainframe software separately from its own hardware. For a potential mainframe purchaser "there is only one company you can go to, and that is IBM," Mr. Friedman says.
EU antitrust officials last week charged Microsoft with anticompetitive behavior, alleging that the company harmed competition in the Web browser market by tying Internet Explorer to its Windows operating system.
T3 may face an uphill battle convincing regulators that they should require IBM to license its software to T3's customers. Such a compulsory license faces a high burden in EU case law. What's more, potential customers have plenty of choices for computing beyond the mainframe.
T3 has also tangled with IBM in U.S. federal court. In an ongoing case, IBM has alleged patent infringement against T3, which has accused IBM of antitrust abuses.
That case stems from a legal scuffle between IBM and an emulator maker, Platform Solutions Inc. T3 joined that case on Platform Solutions' side because it used the company's technology. Platform Solutions had also complained to the EU about IBM, along similar lines as T3. But IBM bought Platform Solutions last year, putting an end to its EU complaint.
EU regulators examine complaints from private parties, but they aren't obligated to bring cases.
An EU spokesman, Jonathan Todd, declined to comment on T3's expected filing. Mr. Todd said that though Platform Solutions withdrew its complaint against IBM, the EU has "continued to look at the sector on our own initiative."
IBM's mainframe marketing was under U.S. judicial oversight for decades, following a 1956 consent decree.
The Wall Street Journal
Iranian media report Baha'i missionary arrests
TEHRAN, Iran- Iranian authorities have reportedly arrested several women for doing missionary work for the Baha'is, the religious group whose persecution by the Islamic republic has been condemned by human rights activists and governments around the globe.
Tabnak, a semi-official Iranian news service, reported the development but did not specify how many women were arrested or when they were seized.
The arrests took place in Kish Island, Iranian territory in the Persian Gulf, the agency said. Tabnak said some of those arrested came from Tehran and others from abroad.
"For a long time now, those who wanted to recruit young Iranian men to join the Baha'is used attractive women as bait," the site said. "Israel has given sanctuary to the leaders of this perverted group [Baha'is] for many years, and the United States and Britain have provided them with billions of dollars to engage in propaganda."This news comes after the Baha'i movement reported that six members of the group were arrested in Tehran this week, including one who works with lawyer and activist Shirin Ebadi, a Nobel peace laureate. Seven leaders of the group seized in 2008 remain in jail.
In a resolution Thursday, the European Parliament condemned Iran's harassment of Ebadi, who had been threatened when she undertook the defense of the seven people arrested. The parliament also criticized the dissemination of "false information" by Iran's Islamic Republic News Agency, which said Ebadi's daughter converted to the Baha'i faith.
The parliament says "allegation can have serious consequences since Baha'i believers are harshly persecuted in Iran."
The Baha'is -- who believe they are targeted in the predominantly Shiite nation because of their faith -- have faced oppression, including arrests, over the years.
They say the persecution is part of a pattern of religious persecution that began in 1979. That's when the monarchy of the Shah of Iran was toppled and an Islamic republic was created.
The Baha'is say the government's philosophies are based largely on the idea that there can be "no prophet following Mohammed" and that their faith "poses a theological challenge to this belief."
The Baha'is say they regard their founder, Baha'u'llah, as "the most recent in the line of Messengers of God that stretches back beyond recorded time and that includes Abraham, Moses, Buddha, Krishna, Zoroaster, Christ and Mohammed."
The Baha'is, regarded as the largest non-Muslim religious minority in Iran, say they have 5 million members around the globe and about 300,000 in Iran.
The Baha'i World Center, which the movement refers to as its "spiritual and administrative heart," is in the Acre/Haifa area in northern Israel. That location predates the founding of the state of Israel; it was formed during the Ottoman Empire's rule of Palestine
Tabnak, a semi-official Iranian news service, reported the development but did not specify how many women were arrested or when they were seized.
The arrests took place in Kish Island, Iranian territory in the Persian Gulf, the agency said. Tabnak said some of those arrested came from Tehran and others from abroad.
"For a long time now, those who wanted to recruit young Iranian men to join the Baha'is used attractive women as bait," the site said. "Israel has given sanctuary to the leaders of this perverted group [Baha'is] for many years, and the United States and Britain have provided them with billions of dollars to engage in propaganda."This news comes after the Baha'i movement reported that six members of the group were arrested in Tehran this week, including one who works with lawyer and activist Shirin Ebadi, a Nobel peace laureate. Seven leaders of the group seized in 2008 remain in jail.
In a resolution Thursday, the European Parliament condemned Iran's harassment of Ebadi, who had been threatened when she undertook the defense of the seven people arrested. The parliament also criticized the dissemination of "false information" by Iran's Islamic Republic News Agency, which said Ebadi's daughter converted to the Baha'i faith.
The parliament says "allegation can have serious consequences since Baha'i believers are harshly persecuted in Iran."
The Baha'is -- who believe they are targeted in the predominantly Shiite nation because of their faith -- have faced oppression, including arrests, over the years.
They say the persecution is part of a pattern of religious persecution that began in 1979. That's when the monarchy of the Shah of Iran was toppled and an Islamic republic was created.
The Baha'is say the government's philosophies are based largely on the idea that there can be "no prophet following Mohammed" and that their faith "poses a theological challenge to this belief."
The Baha'is say they regard their founder, Baha'u'llah, as "the most recent in the line of Messengers of God that stretches back beyond recorded time and that includes Abraham, Moses, Buddha, Krishna, Zoroaster, Christ and Mohammed."
The Baha'is, regarded as the largest non-Muslim religious minority in Iran, say they have 5 million members around the globe and about 300,000 in Iran.
The Baha'i World Center, which the movement refers to as its "spiritual and administrative heart," is in the Acre/Haifa area in northern Israel. That location predates the founding of the state of Israel; it was formed during the Ottoman Empire's rule of Palestine
CNN
Iran season
On February 1, 1979, Ayatollah Ruholla Khomeini returned from exile to Tehran, whereupon he was greeted by millions of Iranians at the airport.Days earlier the last Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, had fled the country, a year after public demonstrations had begun against his rule.His departure signalled the culmination of the Iranian Islamic revolution.Thirty years on Al Jazeera presents a series of special programmes analysing the political circumstances prior to the revolution and how Iranian society has been shaped by the events of 1979.We hear from eyewitnesses who personally knew the Shah and the Ayatollah, dissect the anatomy of the revolution and report from Iran on how the country has changed.
Part One
Part Two
"There was a paradox at the heart of the man," says Abbas Milani, the biographer of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the last Shah of Iran.The Shah was indeed a polarising figure. For the many thousands of Iranians who had taken to the streets in protest at his reign, he was a hated figure, and they greeted his demise with joy.
When he fled Iran on January 16, 1979, never to return, it was an inglorious end for a man who was both a moderniser and an autocrat.
To his supporters he was a patriot. For his critics he was a Western puppet. Rageh Omaar talks to those who knew him to find out who the last King of Iran and the self-proclaimed king of kings really was
I Knew the Shah can be seen at the following times GMT: Tuesday January 20 1430; Wednesday 0130, 0530 and 1230; Thursday 2330; Friday 0730
Al Jazeera
Gas flow to Europe resumes
Gazprom has switched on the gas taps to Europe via Ukraine, ending a dispute that has left millions without heat for weeks. It comes just hours after Moscow and Kiev signed a deal which they hope will put an end to a long-standing gas conflict.It is unclear how long it will take Russian gas to reach European countries but Ukraine’s Prime Minister Timoshenko promised there would be no delays in transit.Russia and Ukraine signed a gas deal on Monday which will allow the two sides to resume transit of Russian fuel to European customers. Gazprom and Naftogaz CEOs, Aleksey Miller and Oleg Dubina, put their signatures on the documents in the presence of Prime Ministers Vladimir Putin of Russia and Yulia Timoshenko of Ukraine.“We have achieved very important results in the talks with our Ukrainian colleagues. All the problems concerning the transit of Russian gas through Ukraine and supplies of gas to Ukraine have been resolved. Therefore I ask you to work together with Ukraine’s Naftogas to synchronise the two gas systems and launch them at 10:00 am Moscow time on January 20,” Miller later said.As Russia’s Prime Minister explained after the signing ceremony, there are two contracts: “a contract to supply gas to Ukraine and a contract for transit that runs for ten years”. Putin also stressed that the two documents are not connected with each other.Thus, the gas dispute was resolved on Monday."We will restart gas transit immediately after this gas gets into Ukraine's gas pipeline system," Timoshenko said after talks with Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin."I hope transit supplies in the European direction will be fully resumed in the near future. Gazprom will do all that is needed for this. We now expect our Ukrainian partners to act accordingly. Once again, I want to express regrets to all those who suffered from the gas crisis – which we consider was not started by the Russian side," the Russian premier said.Meanwhile, Gazprom has been ordered to begin pumping gas in all directions proposed by the Ukrainian partners and will fully meet European consumers' request for the daily amount of gas."Gazprom will take all necessary technological measures to ensure that. We expect our Ukrainian partners to speedily restore their gas transportation system," Putin remarked.According to the agreements Russia and Ukraine have switched to European market formula for calculating gas price from January 1. However, Ukraine will enjoy a 20% discount to the market price in 2009. But by 2010 both countries will switch to full market price.The two prime ministers have also agreed to get rid of a murky middleman company, RosUkrEnergo - a move that experts described as one of the main successes of the talks.“Any middleman increases time and cost, and I’m sure direct deals are normally better than doing through intermediaries,” says political analyst Vladimir Ismailov.However, the deal, hailed by Timoshenko as a very advantageous one for Ukraine, has yet to get approval from her political rival, President Viktor Yushchenko
RT
Russia Today
Al-Sadr's followers eye comeback in Jan. 31 vote
AMARAH, Iraq (AP) -– Followers of anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr hope to win back their position as a major force in this month's regional elections after a string of military and political setbacks last year. Even modest success in the Jan. 31 vote for ruling provincial councils could position the Sadrists as coalition partners in key southern provinces, where a large number of candidates makes it unlikely any single party can win on its own. Anything short of that could relegate the once formidable al-Sadr to political irrelevance — something unthinkable a year ago when his fearsome Mahdi Army militia wielded vast power in Shiite areas of Iraq. ""This month's elections will decide who remains in the political arena and who will go into oblivion,"" said senior Sadrist lawmaker Hassan al-Rubaie. ""If we fail to do well, our movement could fragment, and some of its key figures could be lured away by rival blocs trying to destroy us."" Top Sadrist officials in key southern cities — Basra, Amarah and Najaf — spoke confidently about their election prospects during interviews with The Associated Press. But they fear that authorities may step up arrests of al-Sadr's supporters and campaign workers in response to his call for attacks on U.S. forces in retaliation for Israel's offensive in Gaza. The Sadrists also face a strong threat from the country's two largest Shiite parties — the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council and the Dawa party of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. Both are vigorously campaigning to retain their grip on the south and prevent any inroads by al-Sadr's group, which has been significantly weakened since the heady days when it held sway in Shiite areas of Baghdad and southern Iraq. Hundreds of its key members have been detained by U.S. and Iraqi forces over the past two years — especially after the government crackdown on militias in Baghdad and Basra last spring. The Sadrists' best chance for success could be in Amarah, an oil-rich area near the Iranian border that had been controlled by the cleric's followers before the crackdown last year. The Sadrists remain in control of the provincial council of Maysan, the province of which Amarah is the capital. ""The Sadrist movement will be in a bad situation if we lose Amarah,"" said Hassan al-Husseini, al-Sadr's chief representative in Amarah, 200 miles (320 kilometers) southeast of Baghdad. ""But other groups are determined to oust us from Amarah,"" he said, squatting on the floor beneath a larger-than-life portrait of al-Sadr's father, Grand Ayatollah Mohammed Sadeq al-Sadr, who was gunned down by suspected Saddam Hussein agents in 1999. As in previous elections, no candidates are running explicitly as followers of al-Sadr. They are nominally independent — but the movement makes sure that voters know which candidates it supports. Winning about a third of the council seats in the nine southern provinces would be considered a success, said Salah al-Obeidi, al-Sadr's chief spokesman. The movement wants to prevent the other Shiite parties from winning enough seats to monopolize power, he said. ""Our ultimate goal is not to allow governors to do as they please,"" al-Obeidi said at his Najaf office. The Sadrists, whose movement began in the 1990s, emerged as a formidable political and social force after U.S. troops overthrew Saddam's Sunni-dominated regime in 2003. They survived a 2004 uprising against the Americans after the powerful Shiite clergy intervened to prevent al-Sadr's arrest. Al-Maliki's predecessor, Ibrahim al-Jaafari, brought Sadrists into the government, giving them several Cabinet posts. But the Sadrists did not field a full slate of candidates in the last provincial elections four years ago, leaving the south to the Supreme Council, Dawa and regional groups. Two years ago, it appeared that the Sadrists, who draw strength from millions of impoverished Shiites, would threaten the position of the two major Shiite parties because of complaints of bad governance in the south. But a series of missteps cost the movement dearly. Sadrist ministers pulled out of al-Maliki's Cabinet in 2007 to protest his cooperation with the U.S., depriving the movement much of its influence in government. The move also angered al-Maliki, who ordered U.S.-backed Iraqi forces last year into Basra, the Baghdad district of Sadr City and other areas to wrest control from al-Sadr's militia. The Sadrists' appeal to voters has been their uncompromising anti-American stand, social welfare programs for the poor and the prestige of al-Sadr's late father, who defended Shiite rights when few would speak out under Saddam. ""We are proud of our opposition to the (U.S.) occupation,"" said Ayed al-Mayahi, al-Sadr's representative in Basra. ""Everything that has happened to us was the price we paid for that stand."" Iranian Regime News Agency : Tehran Times
King Abdullah urges Muslims for unity
Makkah: Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz urged the Muslim Ummah to close their ranks and confront the challenges facing it in one voice. "The current situation demands the unification of Muslim ranks and facing the world with a single voice after patching up rifts and burying differences," he said in his opening speech at the International Conference on Fatwa and its Regulations, which began here on Saturday.
The king's speech was read out by Makkah Governor Prince Khaled Al Faisal. More than 170 scholars from around the world gathered at the headquarters of the Muslim World League (MWL) for the five-day event organized by the Islamic Fiqh Academy, an affiliate of MWL.
The conference is aimed at issuing a Fatwa Charter defining the Shariah rules governing issuing of religious edicts (Fatwas).
Addressing the conference, MWL Secretary General Dr. Abdullah Al Turki said that the unprecedented Zionist aggression against the Palestinians is in stark violation of the UN resolutions.
He said there is an organised campaign to divide the Muslim Ummah and the ignorant people are giving religious edicts against the tenets of Islam to misguide, mostly, the young generation, who have no concrete understanding of Islam. "It is Muslims' negligence to practice their religious obligations and distancing themselves from the teachings of the Holy Book and the Sunnah that really make them weak,” he observed.
Dr. Al Turki said earlier that the participants will discuss shortage of muftis in some Islamic countries and the possibility of providing these countries with credible and qualified muftis.
In his speech, Prince Khaled Al Faisal stressed that the time has come for a unified Islamic stand to advance the basic cause of moderation in Islam and fight back those who have wanted to hijack the essence of moderate Islam and turn it into an ideological concept of extremism.
"Today's Islamic communities need to be protected from the chaos of irresponsible extremist Fatwas that could affect the right creed and straight path of new Muslim generations," he said while urging Islamic scholars to counter irresponsible Fatwas by the "intruders” on Islamic jurisprudence, providing them with all help needed from Saudi Arabia.
Meanwhile, noted Saudi writer Turki Al Hamad said that it is high time to expose the danger of hardline ideologies. "The extremists are responsible for making Islam a hostage after hijacking it and misinterpreting its message of tolerance and love for their violence and destruction," he said. Turki Al Hamad, whom many Islamists in the Kingdom, labelled as a "secular writer" said that such hardliners are not going to have an ultimate success.
The king's speech was read out by Makkah Governor Prince Khaled Al Faisal. More than 170 scholars from around the world gathered at the headquarters of the Muslim World League (MWL) for the five-day event organized by the Islamic Fiqh Academy, an affiliate of MWL.
The conference is aimed at issuing a Fatwa Charter defining the Shariah rules governing issuing of religious edicts (Fatwas).
Addressing the conference, MWL Secretary General Dr. Abdullah Al Turki said that the unprecedented Zionist aggression against the Palestinians is in stark violation of the UN resolutions.
He said there is an organised campaign to divide the Muslim Ummah and the ignorant people are giving religious edicts against the tenets of Islam to misguide, mostly, the young generation, who have no concrete understanding of Islam. "It is Muslims' negligence to practice their religious obligations and distancing themselves from the teachings of the Holy Book and the Sunnah that really make them weak,” he observed.
Dr. Al Turki said earlier that the participants will discuss shortage of muftis in some Islamic countries and the possibility of providing these countries with credible and qualified muftis.
In his speech, Prince Khaled Al Faisal stressed that the time has come for a unified Islamic stand to advance the basic cause of moderation in Islam and fight back those who have wanted to hijack the essence of moderate Islam and turn it into an ideological concept of extremism.
"Today's Islamic communities need to be protected from the chaos of irresponsible extremist Fatwas that could affect the right creed and straight path of new Muslim generations," he said while urging Islamic scholars to counter irresponsible Fatwas by the "intruders” on Islamic jurisprudence, providing them with all help needed from Saudi Arabia.
Meanwhile, noted Saudi writer Turki Al Hamad said that it is high time to expose the danger of hardline ideologies. "The extremists are responsible for making Islam a hostage after hijacking it and misinterpreting its message of tolerance and love for their violence and destruction," he said. Turki Al Hamad, whom many Islamists in the Kingdom, labelled as a "secular writer" said that such hardliners are not going to have an ultimate success.
Gulf News
Iran exiles in Iraq say relatives arrested in Tehran
Iraq-based Iranian opposition exiles accused Tehran on Sunday of arresting their family members as they tried to leave Iran to visit them. A spokesman for the exiles said about 20 relatives had been detained by Iranian authorities at Tehran's airport on Saturday while trying to fly to Iraq with valid visas. "They have also raided houses. Now there is no news from the relatives," Shahriar Kia, a spokesman for the group, said by telephone from Camp Ashraf, north of Baghdad, home to about 3,500 exiled members of the People's Mujahideen of Iran (PMOI). Iranian government officials in Tehran were not immediately available for comment. PMOI members -- who had the support of ousted Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein -- say they fear the Iraqi government will try to expel them. U.S. forces transferred control of the camp to the Iraqi government at the start of this year. Iraq says it wants to close the camp but will not force residents to leave. Iraq and the United States consider the PMOI to be a terrorist group. The group says it has renounced violence.Reuters
World Bulletin
World Bulletin
Iranian Holocaust book to be issued in English
The book deals with the "big historical distortion of the Holocaust" and the English and Arabic editions would be published at a ceremony in Tehran later this month, Fars News Agency said.Sunday, 18 January 2009 16:21
A student-linked Iranian publisher plans to launch English- and Arabic-language versions of a book of caricatures and satirical writings about the Holocaust, a semi-official news agency reported on Sunday. The book deals with the "big historical distortion of the Holocaust" and the English and Arabic editions would be published at a ceremony in Tehran later this month, Fars News Agency said. It appeared to be translations of a book which official media in September said had been published about the "fiction of the Holocaust". Details could not immediately be confirmed. "The presentation ceremony will be held on Jan. 27 ... with the attendance of a number of government officials," said Mohammad-Mehdi Hemmati, who is involved in the project. Iran's IRNA news agency said in September the book had 52 caricatures plus satirical writings over 108 pages. It was published by Martyr Shahbazi Publications and the Islamic student movement of the Science and Industry University. Iran staged an international competition and exhibition of cartoons about the Holocaust in 2006. That contest was held in response to anti-Islam cartoons published in Denmark, officials have said. Israel is believed to have the Middle East's only atomic arsenal.
Reuters
Saudi Arabia to donate $1 bln for Gaza reconstruction
Saudi Arabia will donate $1 billion for reconstruction in Gaza following Israel's deadly attacks on the coastal strip, its king said.Monday, 19 January 2009 12:48
Saudi Arabia will donate $1 billion for reconstruction in Gaza following Israel's deadly attacks on the coastal strip, its king said on Monday. "I announce on behalf of your brothers in Saudi Arabia that the kingdom will offer $1 billion as a contribution under the programme proposed by this summit for the reconstruction of Gaza," King Abdullah told an Arab economic summit in Kuwait.
Reuters
World Bulletin
World Bulletin
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
